All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable that the punishment (the imprisonment of August and confiscation of the defendant A, the imprisonment of one year, and the imprisonment of six months and three months for each of the crimes in paragraphs 6 and 8 of the decision of the court below) declared by the court below to the defendants is too unreasonable.

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the judgment of the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). Based on the foregoing legal doctrine, no particular change in circumstances is found in matters subject to sentencing after the sentence of the lower judgment.

In addition, in full view of all the factors such as the Defendants’ age, character and conduct, environment, criminal records, character and conduct, frequency of crime, circumstances leading to the instant crime and circumstances before and after the instant crime, etc., it cannot be said that the sentencing of the lower court exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion because it excessively exceeds the reasonable scope of discretion, in light of the following: the Defendants’ age, character, character, environment, criminal records, personality and conduct, frequency of crime, the circumstances leading to the instant crime, etc.

Therefore, the Defendants’ assertion is without merit.

3. As such, the Defendants’ appeal is without merit, and all of them are dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.