The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendants shall be punished by imprisonment for one year and two months.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal asserts that with respect to the punishment imposed by the court below on the Defendants (one year and six months of imprisonment for each of the defendants), the defendants are too unreasonable, and the prosecutor asserts that it is too uneasible and unfair.

2. We also examine the Defendants and the Prosecutor’s unfair claims for sentencing.

The crime of telephone financing fraud, such as the instant case, is committed systematically and systematically against many unspecified persons, and the subject of the principal damage is serious damage to many victims, and it is not easy to recover damage, and thus, the nature of the crime is inferior, and the harm is high in society. The fact that the Defendants play a counselor in charge of direct deception by telephone, and the extent of the Defendants’ participation in the crime is significant is disadvantageous to the Defendants.

On the other hand, Defendant A and D have agreed with the victim AE in the original trial, Defendant B did not want to be punished against the victim in the first instance trial, and Defendant B did not want to be punished against the said victims, and the period of the Defendants’ criminal acts is not relatively short, and the benefits derived from the criminal acts are not expected to be significant. The following are favorable circumstances for the Defendants: (a) the Defendants did not have any criminal record except for protective disposition or suspension of indictment against the Defendants; (b) the Defendants’ age is relatively lower; and (c) the Defendants’ family members appeal against the Defendant; and (d) Defendant A and D agreed with the victim AE in the first instance trial; (b) the Defendants agreed with the victim AF in the first instance trial; and (c)

In addition, taking into account all the following circumstances, such as character and conduct, environment, family relationship, social ties, motive and background of the crime, amount of fraud, role performed by the Defendants in the crime, circumstances after the crime, equity of punishment against accomplices in similar cases, etc., the lower court should take into account all the conditions of various sentencing as shown in the records and arguments.