However, even though there is a serious social and economic harm to an unspecified number of victims in a planned and systematic manner, the crime was committed in the form of an organization where the crime was committed, and the arrest of the criminal is not easy. Thus, it is necessary to prevent recurrence by thoroughly punishing all the persons who participated in the crime, such as the performance of the crime, the degree of participation, and the size of the actual proceeds of the crime.

In particular, the Defendants’ crime of this case is the so-called “thieth Bosing,” which is mainly for the elderly victims who fall short of the capacity of separation, and it is not good to commit such crimes as theft of cash found in advance by deceiving the police officers, employees of the Financial Supervisory Service, etc., by misrepresenting them, and impairing their residence, thereby impairing them.

In addition, in full view of the various circumstances, including the Defendants’ age, sex, environment, health condition, family relationship, motive, means, and consequence of the crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment against the Defendants is too heavy or it is deemed unfair as it is too low, and thus, the Defendants and the prosecutor’s assertion are without merit.

3. In conclusion, since each appeal by the Defendants and the public prosecutor is without merit, it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is so decided as per Disposition (Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure, since it is obvious that the 3th 20 of the criminal facts of the judgment below is a clerical error of “302”, it is obvious that the 3th 20 of the criminal facts of the judgment below is a clerical error of “302.”