All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing by each of the defendants) is too unreasonable in light of the circumstances and present circumstances under which the defendants committed the instant crime, etc., the sentence of the court below against the defendants (two years of imprisonment and confiscation by each of the defendants) is too unreasonable.

2. The defendants were first offenders who had no record of punishment from the court of the Republic of Korea, and are against the judgment of the court of the Republic of Korea, and there are favorable circumstances such as the defendants' profits generated from the crime of this case. However, the crime of this case is organized, and the crime of this case was committed in the form of an international organization, and the crime of this case was committed in the form of the so-called "scaming" or "tel financial fraud," which raises money to many unspecified people of the Republic of Korea by telephoneing to an unspecified number of citizens. It is hard to regulate because the crime of this case is classified as a crime, and it is hard to regulate and its social harm is very poor. Although the size of damage of this case is not small, it did not recover from damage until now. In light of various sentencing conditions in the argument of this case including age, character, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, the court below's sentence against the defendants is reasonable. Thus, the defendants' assertion is without merit.

3. If so, the Defendants’ appeal is without merit, and all of them are dismissed pursuant to Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.

(However, among the facts of the crime of the judgment of the court below, it is clear that the "victim P" in Part 6, 19 of the judgment of the court below is the "victim S", and the "victim P" in Part 7, 9 is the error of "victim T", and such error is corrected ex officio in accordance with Article 25, Paragraph 1 of the Rules on