The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for seven months for the first crime as stated in the judgment below, and the second crime as stated in the judgment of the court below.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Each sentence (Defendant A: Imprisonment with prison labor for 6 months in relation to the first crime as stated in the judgment of the court below, and 2 months in relation to the second crime as stated in the judgment of the court below, Defendant B: Imprisonment with prison labor for 8 months) that the court below sentenced the Defendants to the defendants is too unreasonable.

B. The above punishment sentenced by the prosecutor by the court below against the defendants is too unhued and unfair.

2. As to the Defendants and the Prosecutor’s assertion of unfair sentencing, the Defendants were examined together with each of the instant facts charged, and the Defendants against mistake, and the Defendants’ punishment should be determined in consideration of equity in the case where the first head of the criminal facts stated in the judgment of the court below, which became final and conclusive, with regard to the crimes No. 1 of the Defendant A’s judgment, at the same time, with regard to the judgment of the court below. However, it is recognized that the total amount of damage of the instant case exceeds KRW 60 million, and the Defendants did not agree with the victims until the trial of the court of appeal. In particular, even if the Defendants did not agree with the victims, they submitted a written agreement to the court of the

(See the reasoning of the judgment of the original court). Defendant B shows an attitude of warning criminal procedures, such as being absent on the date of the decision of the original court; Defendant A, who has the record of criminal punishment four times of suspended sentence due to the same fraud, committed the crime of Article 2 of the judgment of the original court without being aware of the suspended sentence due to the crime of fraud; Defendant B, including once the sentence of the same fraud, has a record of criminal punishment for several times including one time, and other factors of sentencing specified in the records and arguments of this case, such as the age, character, character, environment, family relationship, etc. of the Defendants, the sentence of the original court is deemed unfair because it is too unreasonable. Accordingly, the Defendants’ assertion is without merit, and the prosecutor’s assertion is without merit.