A. The sentence of the lower court (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. The instant case is that the Defendant took part in the telephone financial fraud organization and acquired approximately KRW 70 million in total by deceiving an unspecified number of victims as if he/she were to give a loan to an unspecified number of victims. In light of the content and result of the instant crime, the amount of damage, and the social harm of telephone financial fraud, etc., but the Defendant was not less likely to have committed a crime, on the other hand, was showing an attitude that the Defendant was aware of and against his/her mistake, and the Defendant was given a direct direction to E, etc. or obtained economic benefits from the instant crime.

There is no specific and direct material that can be seen.

In addition, one defendant has no criminal records of the same kind.

Considering the above sentence imposed on the defendant, the age of the defendant, sexual conduct, environment, and all other conditions of sentencing as shown in the argument of this case, the punishment of the court below does not seem to be too heavy or unreasonable because it is within the proper scope of the discretion of sentencing.

Therefore, the above argument by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit.

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