2. The Defendants are against the instant crime, and the victim E and F did not punish the said Defendant under the agreement with the Defendant A.

However, the amount of damage caused by the instant crime is a large amount of KRW 420 million, and most victims have not recovered.

Defendant

A, as the president of the corporate office, play a leading role in the crime of defraudation of this case, used the money obtained through the crime of this case for corporate bonds and their living expenses, and Defendant B participated in the crime of defraudation of this case as an employee of the corporate office, and used part of the money obtained by Defendant A as monthly salary and living expenses.

Defendant

A has the record of being sentenced to three times of punishment and one fine for the same crime. On June 16, 2013, the execution of the sentence was completed, and on June 16, 2013, Defendant B has committed the instant crime again, and Defendant B has the record of being sentenced to two times of punishment and four times of fine for the same crime.

In addition, in full view of various circumstances, including the Defendants’ age, character and conduct, environment, details and contents of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment is deemed to be too unreasonable, and thus, the Defendants’ above assertion is without merit.

3. Accordingly, the defendants' appeal of this case is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, since the defendants' appeal of this case is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.