2. The fact that the defendant all of the crimes of this case recognized and appears to be against the truth, that the court agreed to pay the victim D money equivalent to the amount of damage in the trial, and that the defendant is the first offender is favorable to the defendant.

However, the crime of this case is a so-called “singing” crime that actually causes damage that is difficult to recover in a planned and systematic manner against many unspecified victims, and its nature is not very good, and the voice of social criticism is high, even if the defendant is merely a withdrawal measure, the defendant would receive a certain amount of money per case from a superior officer. The role of withdrawal measures is that the defendant's liability is not less less severe due to the essential part of the establishment of the crime. The remaining part of the crime is not agreed with the victim G is not yet agreed with the victim G, and other various circumstances are considered, which are the conditions for sentencing specified in the records and arguments of this case, such as the motive and circumstance of the crime of this case, the circumstances after the crime, the defendant's age, character and behavior, and environment, and it is not determined that the sentence imposed by the court below is too heavy or unreasonable.

3. In conclusion, the appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit, and all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.