The judgment below

The parts of the defendant A, B, C, and E shall be reversed.

Defendant

Defendant A and B shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for one year.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is improper because it is too unreasonable that the court below's each sentence (one year and six months of imprisonment for each of the defendants, one year and one year of imprisonment for each of the defendants C, and two years of imprisonment for each of the defendants D) declared by the court below against the defendants.

2. Determination

A. Each of the instant crimes against Defendant A, B, C, and E was limited to the extent that the Defendants participated in the telephone finance fraud in collusion with the members of the telephone finance fraud group to demand the victims to transfer money by calling. The Defendants’ participation in the instant crime was not high in light of the content and result of such crime, the amount of damage, the amount of damage, and the social harm of the telephone finance fraud.

In addition, even though the damage caused by each of the crimes in this case was considerably significant, the damage was not recovered.

On the other hand, however, the defendants have shown the attitude of reflecting all their mistakes, and the defendants A, B, C, and E have no record of criminal punishment prior to each of the crimes in this case.

In addition, there is no reason to consider the circumstances that the Defendants initially left China upon the solicitation of those persons who would be able to punish money if they were to engage in the commission of the Defendants in China. There is a difference in the period of actual participation in each of the crimes of this case, and the period of actual participation of the Defendants differs, but the punishment should be determined in consideration of the period of each of the crimes of this case.

B. In the case of Defendant B, the principle of equity with the case where a judgment is rendered on February 5, 2016 and the case where a judgment is rendered at the same time in relation to the concurrent crimes of a group after Article 37 of the Criminal Act.

In light of the above conditions unfavorable or favorable to the Defendants, the circumstances after the commission of each of the instant crimes, the Defendants’ age, sexual conduct, environment, and all other conditions of sentencing as shown in the pleadings of the instant case, the lower court’s respective punishment imposed on the Defendants is unreasonable, and thus, the Defendants’ respective arguments are concerned.