All appeals filed by the Defendants B and the Prosecutor are dismissed.

A. The punishment sentenced by the court below to Defendant B (one year and four months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence that the court below sentenced the Defendants (the defendant A: one year of imprisonment with prison labor; three years of suspended execution; one year and four months of imprisonment) is too unfluent and unfair.

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). We examine the following: (a) there is no change of circumstances that may be considered in sentencing after the lower judgment; (b) Defendant B appears to have recognized and reflected all the instant crimes since the lower court was in the trial; and (c) Defendant B appears to have reached an agreement by paying a total of KRW 90 million to the victim K at the lower court; and (d) the foregoing agreement appears to include KRW 40 million that Defendant B received as agreed money from Defendant A in the name of agreement; and (b) taking into account the various factors of sentencing as indicated in the instant records and arguments, even if considering the circumstances asserted by Defendant B and the Prosecutor as reasons for appeal, the lower court’s punishment against Defendant B is too heavy, or the sentence against the Defendants was too unhued, and thus, it does not seem to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

3. In conclusion, since the appeal against the Defendants by Defendant B and the Prosecutor is without merit, it is dismissed in entirety under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.