All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant B was not aware of the fact that he committed the so-called “phishing” crime as stated in the judgment of the court below, and there is no fact that Defendant B conspired with other assistant employees and conspired with them to commit the crime.

B. The lower court’s each sentence against the Defendants is too unreasonable on the ground that the Defendants’ respective sentences are too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the facts acknowledged by the lower court based on the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court (Defendant B), in particular, the status and role of Defendant B, and the detailed methods and process of the crime, even if the Defendant was not well aware of the entire contents of the instant crime, it can be deemed that the Defendant issued the passbook under his name to E with the recognition of the fact that the Defendant committed financial fraud, such as Bophishing, even if he was unaware of the entire contents of the instant

In addition, as long as the defendant served as part of the entire crime, it can be sufficiently recognized that the defendant committed the crime of this case in collusion with other accomplices.

Therefore, Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

B. Both the Defendants reflects on the wrong sentencing (the Defendants) and Defendant B has no record of punishment of the same kind or imprisonment without prison labor or more.

However, even though Defendant A has already been punished for the same kind of crime, in particular, even though he is a repeated crime, he/she again commits another crime at only one month after release, and the nature of the crime is not good, and the amount of defraudation by Defendant B is not small until now, he/she has not received a letter from the victims.

In addition, considering the motive, means and result of the instant crime, the Defendants’ age, character and conduct, environment, health status, criminal records, and circumstances after the commission of the crime, all of the sentencing circumstances in the records are not unfair because all of the lower court’s punishment against the Defendants is too unreasonable.

Therefore, Defendants.