All of the appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that each type of punishment (as for Defendant A: a fine of KRW 7 million; a fine of KRW 3 million for Defendant B: a fine of KRW 3 million) on the Defendants is excessively uneasible and unreasonable.

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the first instance court’s sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). In this case, where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court’s sentencing compared to that of the first instance court, the first instance court’s age, sexual behavior, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, the circumstances after the crime, etc. are considered appropriate, comprehensively taking account of the various circumstances, which are the conditions of sentencing as indicated in the first instance court’s “reasons for sentencing”, and it does not seem that the first instance court’s age, sexual behavior, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, and thus, it does not seem to exceed the reasonable scope of discretion.

Therefore, prosecutor's assertion is not accepted.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal against the Defendants is without merit, and all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act (Article 25 (1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure, provided that each "Article 124 (1) 2 of the Rules on Criminal Procedure" shall be dismissed in accordance with Article 25 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and each "Article 124 (1) 3 of the Rules on Criminal Procedure."