All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

The summary of the grounds for appeal that the court below sentenced the Defendants to each punishment (one year of imprisonment and one year of confiscation, and one year of imprisonment) is unreasonable.

Judgment

It is recognized that the Defendants did not have any history of criminal punishment, and that the lower court agreed with the victims.

However, it is necessary to strictly punish the Defendants’ participation in the crime in that it is very poor in the nature of the crime as the so-called “Sishing,” and that it causes adverse effects on society by massing many and unspecified victims.

The Defendants received and kept access media under the name of another person for the commission of the crime of Bosing. In particular, Defendant B withdrawn the amount of damage, Defendant A deposited the remainder of the withdrawn money, excluding the fee, into the account in the name of the Defendant Company A, and delivered it to the said assistant. Defendant C was a driving to withdraw the amount of damage or move to the place of receiving access media, and the extent of the Defendants participated in the crime of Bosing.

In full view of the above circumstances and the Defendants’ age, sex, environment, family relationship, motive and background of the crime, means and consequence of the crime, etc., and the scope of recommended sentence according to the sentencing guidelines set by the Supreme Court’s Sentencing Committee, the lower court’s punishment against the Defendants cannot be deemed unfair because it is too too unreasonable.

Therefore, the Defendants’ assertion is without merit.

In conclusion, the defendants' appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, since the defendants' appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.