All appeals filed by the prosecutor against the Defendants are dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the lower court’s sentence (defendant D; 1 year and 6 months of imprisonment; 2 years of probation; 160 hours of community service order; 6 months of imprisonment; 2 years of suspended execution; 2 years of imprisonment with prison labor; 2 years of suspended execution; 2 years of suspended execution) against the Defendants is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. In comparison with the judgment of the court below, if there is no change in the sentencing conditions in comparison with the judgment of the court below, and the sentencing of the court below is not beyond the reasonable scope of discretion, it is necessary to respect them (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The court below held that with respect to Defendant D, the number of times the above Defendant participated in the crime was only two times, some victims have paid damages, have agreed with the victim, have committed the crime of this case intentionally with negligence, have been found to have committed the crime of this case. The fraud of this case was committed systematically and systematically and systematically, and there is a need for strict punishment of the participants, and the amount of damages in this case was considerably unfavorable to each other, and it appears that there was no special change in the sentencing conditions that the above Defendants did not have any profits from the crime of this case since there was no specific change in the terms of the punishment of this case since there was no specific change in the terms of the punishment of this case.

In addition, in full view of all the sentencing conditions indicated in the records of the instant case, including the Defendants’ age, sex, environment, motive leading to the commission of the crime, means and method of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, the lower court’s sentencing against the Defendants is too uneasible.