All appeals by the Defendants and the Prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Each sentence sentenced by the court below (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. Each of the above types sentenced by the prosecutor's court below is too uneasible and unfair.

2. As to the Defendants and the prosecutor’s assertion of unfair sentencing, it is recognized that the Defendants and their accomplices are divided into their mistakes, that the Defendants and their accomplices have repaid most of their fraudulent damage and agreed with some victims, that they have reached an agreement with the victim AH [the victim AC already stated in the court below that it was reimbursed for damage and has already made an agreement with the victim AH], that Defendant A had no record of punishment heavier than a fine (the trial record was 104 pages) and there was no record of punishment heavier than a fine, and that Defendant B was the primary offender.

However, each of the instant crimes committed by the Defendants, on a systematic, planned, and repeated basis, against an unspecified number of victims. The Defendants committed the so-called “wishing” crime. The crime is deemed to have been significantly led by the Defendants, as well as the Defendants, in the process of participating in the Defendants’ participation in the crime, and specifically performed the roles of the Defendants, such as the solicitation of passbooks and telephone counseling, etc., are essential for the crime, such as: (a) the nature of each of the instant crimes is very difficult to make the victims more difficult; and (b) the social harm is very serious; (c) the crime of “wishing,” which appeared in Korea for a long time, is very serious; and (d) the crime of “wishing,” which appeared in Korea, is not eradicated despite the media publicity and the intensive control and punishment by the judicial authorities.