A. Defendants: The lower court’s punishment against the Defendants is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor: The lower court’s each sentence against the Defendants is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. There are circumstances in which the Defendants are against the mistake of the Defendants.

However, the crime of this case is committed by the defendants by leasing 6 officetels rooms and operating specialized commercial sex acts establishments. In particular, the defendant A led the crime, and the defendant B had already been punished by the same method at the same place, despite the fact that the defendant B had already been punished by the same act.

In addition, in full view of the motive, means and result of the instant crime, the Defendants’ age, character and conduct, environment, health status, criminal record, and circumstances after the commission of the crime, all of the lower court’s punishment against the Defendants is appropriate.

Therefore, the Defendants and the Prosecutor’s argument are without merit.

3. In conclusion, the appeal by the Defendants and the prosecutor is without merit and all of the appeals are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.