All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Reasons for appeal;

A. Fact-finding (Defendant B) Defendant B was aware of the victim through Defendant A, and there was no benefit from the victim’s and witness’s statements. The victim’s and witness’s statements are false statements contrary to memory and thus, it is not reliable, and there is no evidence to find otherwise that Defendant B was involved in the instant crime.

B. The respective sentence of the lower court (the Defendants) (the two years of imprisonment with prison labor for Defendant A, Defendant B, Defendant B: imprisonment with prison labor for six months, and one year of suspended execution) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In the lower court’s determination as to Defendant B’s assertion of misunderstanding of the facts, Defendant B alleged that the victim’s statement was not sufficient to have committed the instant crime while denying the credibility of the victim’s statement as in the trial at the same time. Accordingly, the lower court determined that Defendant B committed the instant crime not only recognized the credibility of the victim’s statement, but also recognized the fact that Defendant B committed the instant crime, by taking full account of the circumstances acknowledged in accordance

Examining the above judgment of the court below after comparing it with the records, the judgment of the court below is just and it is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts as alleged by the defendant B.

subsection (b) of this section.

B. According to the instant argument and record regarding the Defendants’ wrongful assertion of sentencing, the lower court appears to have been reasonably determined by fully considering the grounds for sentencing alleged by the Defendants, and the Defendant A’s transfer of KRW 45 million to the victim for the recovery of damage when he/she led to the confession of all criminal facts in the first instance trial, alone, cannot be deemed as a special circumstance to the extent that ex post changes in sentencing.

3. In conclusion, the Defendants’ appeal is without merit, and all of the appeals are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.