The sentence of each of the defendants (the defendant A: 2 years of imprisonment, the defendant B: 1 year and 6 months of imprisonment, and the defendant C: 1 year and 4 months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

Each of the above sentence of the prosecutor's court below is too uneasible and unfair.

Judgment

We examine both the Defendants’ assertion of unfair sentencing and the prosecutor’s assertion of unfair sentencing.

The Defendants are deemed to have led to the confession and reflect of each of the crimes of this case; the Defendants’ acquisition profits from each of the crimes of this case seems to be relatively large; Defendant A and Defendant B agreed with the victim H; Defendant B, from October 2012, even though they were to escape from the crime of this case. Meanwhile, each of the crimes of this case is highly likely to have social and economic harm due to the typical examples of the so-called “wrishing” fraud committed against many unspecified persons in a planned and organized manner; Defendant’s act of cash withdrawal performed by the Defendants through a successive liaison with other accomplices is essential for the completion of all of the crimes; in light of the frequency of the crimes; the number of crimes; the amount of money obtained by the Defendants; and the number of victims, etc., the total amount of damage from each of the crimes of this case exceeds KRW 100 million; Defendant B and Defendant B, from around October 2012, were deemed to have not been sufficiently recovered; Defendant’s participation in the crime of this case; the degree of punishment of each of the crimes of this case; and the following circumstances.

Therefore, each of the defendants and the prosecutor's arguments is without merit.

In conclusion, each appeal by the Defendants and the public prosecutor is without merit and criminal procedure law.