All of the appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (one year of imprisonment with prison labor for Defendant A, and two years of suspended execution with prison labor for Defendant B) declared by the lower court is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. There is no change in the terms and conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and where the sentencing of the first instance 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). Based on the foregoing legal doctrine, there is no change in the sentencing conditions compared with the lower court’s judgment because new materials on sentencing have not been submitted in the trial, and considering the factors revealed in the arguments in the instant case, the lower court’s sentencing was too unfluent and so, exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

It does not appear.

Therefore, prosecutor's assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor’s appeal is dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that all of the appeals are without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition (Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. However, since the “(quasi-Fraud)” of the column 2 for the application of the law among the judgment of the court below is a clerical error of “(joint quasi-Fraud)”, and the “(quasi-Fraud)” of the three parallels is a clerical error of “(the point of sole quasi-Fraud)”, the correction is made ex officio in accordance with Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure.