All appeals filed by A and prosecutor are dismissed.

A. The sentencing of Defendant A is too inappropriate.

B. The lower court’s sentencing against the Defendants by the prosecutor is too uncomfortable.

2. Considering the fact that the nature of the instant crime was not good and that the Defendants did not agree with the victims until the trial was held, strict punishment against the Defendants is necessary.

However, considering the Defendants’ depth of their mistake, Defendant A did not have any particular criminal record other than a fine once, Defendant B’s primary crime without any criminal record, and the degree of participation in the instant crime is relatively minor, and other conditions of sentencing specified in the pleadings of the instant case, such as the Defendants’ age, sex and environment, motive, means and consequence of the instant crime, etc., the sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendants is deemed appropriate, and is too heavy or unreasonable. Thus, the aforementioned arguments by Defendant A and the Prosecutor are without merit.

3. In conclusion, the appeal filed by the prosecutor against the defendant A and the defendants is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal filed by the prosecutor is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition. [Article 49 (4) 2 and Article 6 (3) 2 of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act are omitted after "Article 30 of the Criminal Act" and "Article 49 (4) 2 and Article 6 (3) 2 of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act" were omitted after "Article 30 of the Criminal Act on the grounds that the appeal filed by the prosecutor against the defendant A and the defendants is without merit." Articles 40 and 50 (1) of the Criminal Act on the grounds that the crime of fraud, such as computer, etc. against H, and the crime of violation of special law on the prevention of telecommunications fraud and the refund of damage caused by telecommunications fraud, telecommunications fraud prevention against the F, and the crime of violation of Article 50 of the Special Act on the Prevention of Fraud and Compensation of Damage Caused by Telecommunications).