The judgment below

Part of the compensation order, except the compensation order, shall be reversed.

Defendant

A Imprisonment with prison labor for two years and for one year.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (for defendant A, two years and six months of imprisonment, three years of suspended execution, three years of social service, 300 hours of service, two years of suspended execution, three years of probation, three years of social service, two years of work, one year of suspended execution, two years of service, two years of suspended execution, and one hundred and twenty hours of social service) is too unfford and unfair;

2. In full view of the following facts: (a) the Defendants were active in the withdrawal of the Bosing; and (b) the Defendants did not take the same withdrawal measures as the Defendants, the crime of Bosing cannot occur; and (c) the Defendants need heavy punishment; and (d) the victims were not completely recovered from damage, the lower court’s sentence that sentenced the Defendants to a suspended sentence is too uneasible and unfair.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is with merit, and the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is again decided as follows.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts charged and the summary of the evidence recognized by the court are as shown in each corresponding column of the judgment below, and thus, they are cited in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Articles of the Criminal Act and the selective Defendants of the punishment: Articles 347 (1) and 30 of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendants C and D who commit concurrent crimes: the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act and Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendants among concurrent crimes: (a) the reasons for sentencing under the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act (as to concurrent crimes committed against AJ with the largest amount of criminal intent), are the withdrawal measures of the Bosing organization; (b) if there is no such withdrawal measures as the Defendants, the crime cannot be committed; and (c) the Defendants’ nature of the crime is not less than that of the Defendants; (d) the Defendants committed the crime of Bosing organization, which led to the total amount of KRW 96 million to the victims; and (e) the amount of damage caused by the Defendants’ direct commission.