All appeals by the Defendants and the Prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Judgment on the prosecutor's assertion of mistake as to the facts (the part not guilty as to Defendant B)

A. According to the evidence presented in the assertion, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant on this part of the facts charged is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts.

B. The lower court recognized the circumstances as indicated in its reasoning by comprehensively taking account of the adopted evidence, and based on this, proved that this part of the facts charged is beyond reasonable doubt.

It is difficult to see

The Court rendered a not-guilty verdict.

Examining the various circumstances cited by the lower court in a thorough and consistent manner with the record, there is no reasonable circumstance to deem that the lower court’s determination of evidence was clearly erroneous or that the argument leading to the acknowledgement of facts is significantly unfair due to the violation of logical and empirical rules.

We do not accept the Prosecutor’s assertion that the lower judgment erred by mistake in fact on the premise different from this premise.

2. The Defendants and the prosecutor asserts that the sentence of the lower court is too heavy or unfilled so that the Defendants and the prosecutor’s argument that the sentencing of the Defendants and the prosecutor is unfair.

In a case where there is no change in the sentencing conditions compared with the lower court, and the sentencing of the lower court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The instant crime was committed by the Defendants, jointly with H, and jointly with H, by giving the majority of victims, and by issuing a passbook, card, cell phone, etc., and sell it to the victims of name, and during that process, the defense counsel of the Defendant A, who detained certain victims, did not legally constitute “detention.”

However, as the court below made a proper decision on Defendant A and his defense counsel’s assertion, this assertion is that Defendant A’s act constitutes confinement.