All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the sentence imposed by the court below on the Defendants (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The fact that the Defendants both recognize and oppose the mistake of all the Defendants, the volume of capture of the minc line and the profits earned by the Defendants in the instant crime appears to have been increased in the commission of the instant crime, the fact that there are family members to support the instant crime, which is in an economically difficult situation due to the decrease of catch, and the fact that there is a violation of the Fisheries Act, which became final and conclusive on October 24, 2016 and the crime of violation of the Fisheries Act, which was committed on October 24, 2016, are in the concurrent crimes of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and it is necessary to determine the punishment in consideration of equity with the case where the judgment is rendered at the same time.

However, as above, the court below seems to have determined a punishment by taking into account the favorable circumstances for the Defendants. The crime of this case was committed by Defendant A and Defendant B, a captain of “N”, on board the ship with other crew members, illegally captured mincing the above ship. The crime of this case was planned and organized, and the method of the crime is not sufficient, and it is necessary to punish strictly because it is a serious crime that leads to the extinction of international endangered species. Defendant A, as captain, proposed and led the crime of this case first, and actively participated in the crime of this case, such as taking measures that prevent Defendant B from running away, and Defendant B had the record of being sentenced once as sentenced to a fine for the same kind of crime, and Defendant A committed another crime of this case during the suspension of the execution of the sentence of imprisonment with prison labor for the same kind of crime, Defendant B was sentenced twice as a fine, and Defendant A was sentenced twice a fine on February 1, 2015. In particular, Defendant A was sentenced to a suspended sentence of imprisonment with prison labor for the Fisheries Act for a period of two months.