The judgment below

Defendant A and D shall be reversed.

Defendant

A Imprisonment for four years, and Defendant D for ten months, respectively.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the Defendants) is too unreasonable that the sentence of the lower court (five years of imprisonment with prison labor for Defendant A and one year of imprisonment with prison labor for Defendant D) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The nature of the instant crime committed with respect to Defendant A, which constitutes the so-called “Sishing” crime, causes serious harm not only to the victim, but also to our society as a whole, and is causing damage to an unspecified number of victims in a planned and systematic manner, and the nature of the instant crime is very bad.

In addition, the fact that multiple victims occurred due to the instant crime, the amount of damage is very large, Defendant A did not agree with other victims except as agreed with the victim Q, Defendant A did not make an essential contribution to the implementation of the entire crime by recruiting telephone counselors in Korea to China, and served as the so-called “broer” to send them to China, and can be acknowledged as disadvantageous circumstances such as the degree of participation in the crime is very significant.

However, the Defendant did not have any history of punishment for the same crime, and committed some frauds by using computers, etc., and was arrested after the crime of this case, the Defendant actively cooperated in the investigation, as well as the victim Q by agreement with the victim Q, and the said victim revealed his intention not to punish the Defendant A.

The Defendant is both starting to commit the instant crime. In particular, the Defendant may recognize the circumstances such as deposit of considerable money to many victims in the appellate trial, making efforts to recover damage, etc.

In full view of all the above circumstances and the sentencing conditions indicated in the records, including Defendant A’s age, sexual conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence, etc., the lower court’s punishment is somewhat unreasonable.

B. As seen earlier, Defendant D is Washington.