2. The Defendants are deemed to have committed the instant crime as a public official, and the punishment corresponding thereto is required. However, even though the Defendants recognized all the instant facts charged, the Defendants are deemed to have violated their wrongness, the Defendants’ period of operation of the instant arrangement business establishment is not so long as the profits they acquired are difficult to view, the Defendants lost their status as public official due to the instant crime; Defendant A was the primary offender without any previous conviction; Defendant A was the first offender without any previous conviction; Defendant B did not have any previous criminal records other than once a fine due to drunk driving; and other various sentencing conditions specified in the instant records and arguments, such as the Defendants’ age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, and circumstances after the crime, are considered, and thus, the lower court’s each sentence imposed against the Defendants is deemed to be unreasonable. Therefore, the Prosecutor’s assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal against the defendants is without merit, and all of the appeals are dismissed under Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.