All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

Based on the grounds of appeal of this case, the Defendants asserted that the sentence of the lower court against the Defendants (the Defendant A’s fine of KRW 3,000,000, Defendant B’s fine of KRW 500,000) is too unreasonable.

However, despite the fact that the visually impaired was punished for the same kind of crime, Defendant A again committed the instant crime despite having had a record of punishment for the same kind of crime, Defendant B directly embling an act in spite of the absence of qualification as a massage, and the nature of the crime is not weak.

In full view of the aforementioned circumstances, the Defendants’ developments and methods of committing the instant crime, the scale and period of business, the period of punishment, the age, character and conduct, career, home environment, etc. of the Defendants, and all other circumstances, which form the conditions for sentencing as shown in the records and oral argument, do not change compared with the original judgment. In full view of all of the aforementioned circumstances, the lower court’s sentencing cannot be deemed unfair because it goes beyond the reasonable scope of discretion.

Therefore, the defendants' appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, since there is no reason to do so.