A All appeals filed against the Defendants by the Prosecutor and the Prosecutor are dismissed.

A. The punishment sentenced by the lower court against Defendant A (one year and six months of imprisonment and confiscation) is too unreasonable.

B. The above sentence sentenced by the court below to Defendant A and the sentence sentenced to Defendant B (one hundred years of imprisonment with prison labor, three years of suspended execution, and confiscation) are too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination

A. Defendant A’s each of the instant offenses committed against Defendant A and the Prosecutor’s each of the instant offenses against Defendant A reflects the depth of the determination of unfair sentencing. In 2011, there are no criminal records except for the punishment of fines once for each of the instant offenses. It appears that there was no substantial profit from each of the instant offenses. At the trial, Defendant A deposited KRW 1 million for F out of the victims of the instant fraud, in collusion with Defendant A’s “E”, which is one of the causes of the criminal organization of telephone financial fraud, which is closely planned and organized against many and unspecified persons; Defendant A committed the so-called “Sishing” offense; Defendant A’s each of the instant offenses committed against Defendant A; Defendant A conspired with “E” in collusion with each of the instant offenses; (1) victim F, Z or A’s staff under the name of the financial fraud organization; and (2) withdrawal or withdrawal of money from each of the instant accounts with the victim’s own account or with the victim’s money transferred from each of the instant offenses; and (3) withdrawal or withdrawal of money from each of the account.