2. The crime of this case was committed closely and systematically for the elderly who are not in a good health condition, and the nature of the crime is not good. The medicines sold by the defendants are entirely or partially impossible to use them for food, and the risk of causing serious side effects, depending on the case, is considerably high. Defendant A has a number of criminal records of the same kind including the criminal records of probation, and Defendant C and E have the records of punishment twice for the same crime, which are disadvantageous to the defendants.

However, the defendants recognized all the crimes of this case, and agreed that they are against their depth through the life of detention for 50 days, most of the victims whose identity has been confirmed, and that they want to take the Defendant’s wife against the Defendants, that they deposited in cash 7,50,000 won equivalent to the amount of damage to Defendant C and E, that there is no criminal conviction or more than a suspended sentence, and that Defendant A has no criminal conviction, and that there is no other criminal conviction, and all other circumstances that form the conditions for the sentencing of this case, including the Defendants’ age, sex, environment, motive and circumstance leading to the crime of this case, and circumstances before and after the crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment is too uneasy and unfair. Thus, the prosecutor’s allegation above is without merit.

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