All appeals filed by the prosecutor against the Defendants are dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds of appeal is that the Defendants committed the instant crime during the period of suspension of the execution of the instant crime, the profits acquired by the Defendants, and Defendant A committed the instant crime during the period of suspension of the execution of the instant crime, and Defendant B denied the instant crime even though he committed the instant crime for the purpose of using the so-called card tin. In light of the above, the sentence against the Defendants (Defendant A: fine of KRW 7 million, and Defendant B: imprisonment of KRW 20 million), which the lower court sentenced against the Defendants, is unreasonable.

2. The Criminal Procedure Act, which takes the trial-oriented principle and the direct principle, ought to respect the determination of sentencing in cases where there exists a unique area of the first instance court, and there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). There is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the original judgment as the new sentencing materials have not been submitted at the trial court. In full view of all of the reasons for sentencing indicated in the records of this case, the lower court’s sentencing is too unfluent and so it cannot be deemed that the lower court exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

3. In conclusion, the appeal against the Defendants by the prosecutor is without merit, and all of the appeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.