Of them, the part against Defendant C shall be reversed.

Defendant

C A person shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than three years and six months.

evidence of seizure.

A. The sentencing of the lower court (Defendant C: Imprisonment with prison labor for 4 years, confiscation, Defendant D: imprisonment with prison labor for 1 year and 6 months, and confiscation) is too unreasonable.

B. The above sentencing against Defendant C of the lower court by the Prosecutor is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the grounds for appeal

A. We also examine Defendant C’s wrongful assertion of sentencing between Defendant C and Prosecutor.

In light of the fact that the defendant, a single-person I, a Chinese total book, returned to China, and received 12,543,200 won from the co-defendant A and B, and remitted money to the needy person according to I's instructions, etc., which is a significant crime, and that the defendant involved in the crime, the crime is committed by Bosing that the method of committing the crime causes an undiscriminatory and serious damage to many and unspecified persons, and that there are records of criminal punishment several times, it is necessary to strictly punish the defendant.

However, examining the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant was aware of and divided into the instant crime; (b) the Defendant paid a total of KRW 4,270,000 to some victims for the time of the instant crime; (c) there was no previous conviction exceeding the fine; and (d) the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, motive and circumstance of the instant crime, means and consequence; and (b) other circumstances that form the conditions of sentencing as shown in the records and pleadings, such as the circumstances after the instant crime, are deemed unfair and unfair.

B. There are circumstances that may be considered in light of the circumstances, such as the fact that Defendant D was aware of the instant crime and divided, and that there was no record of criminal punishment in addition to the punishment imposed due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving). However, the lower court appears to have determined the punishment by reflecting both of the circumstances in the lower court and there was no special circumstance that could change the punishment in the first instance.

On the other hand, the defendant took part in the case.