All appeals by the Defendants and the Prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of reasons for appeal - Each sentencing undue

A. In light of the motive of the Defendants’ participation in the commission of the commission of the crime, the degree of participation in the commission of the crime, the amount of benefits acquired by the commission of the crime, and other various sentencing conditions, the punishment imposed by the court below against the Defendants (two years of imprisonment and one year and six months of imprisonment) is excessively unreasonable.

B. In light of the harm and injury of the so-called “scaming” crime committed by the prosecutor, the sentence imposed by the court below against the Defendants is too unfilled and unfair.

2. Determination

A. The prosecutor’s assertion that it is necessary to strictize the so-called “phishing” crime is sufficiently acceptable.

B. Meanwhile, both the Defendants are the primary offenders, and they are in profoundly against the fact that they were found to have committed a bad crime ( Defendant B denied the crime to the effect that they were to belong to other accomplices at the lower court, but only if they were in the first instance trial, they are aware of the crime itself, and argued to the effect that the circumstances that are likely to lead to the instant crime are to be considered as being difficult and difficult for the accomplices.)

In full view of the aforementioned circumstances and the Defendants’ age, the role to which the Defendants shared in the course of the commission of the crime, the result of the crime, and the profits acquired by the Defendants, the lower court’s punishment is excessively heavy or excessively light.

It does not seem that it does not appear.

3. According to the conclusion, each appeal by the Defendants and the prosecutor who asserts unfair sentencing is groundless, and all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.