All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. In light of the summary of the grounds for appeal in this case’s sentencing conditions, each sentence of the lower court against the Defendants (one year of imprisonment, one year of confiscation, and one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The facts that the Defendants led to the confession and reflect of the instant crime, and that most of the damages were recovered by depositing the amount of damages for the victims who agreed or failed to agree with a considerable number of victims after the crime are favorable to the Defendants.

However, even though the Defendants had been punished for the larceny of the same law, they returned to the country, and they committed the larceny of the same law repeatedly, and committed the crime by combining the stolen credit card with the crime, and committed the crime, which is in bad quality and circumstances. The lower court appears to have determined the term of punishment by taking into account the favorable circumstances in relation to the Defendants. The lower court did not appear to have any change in circumstances that could have different from the lower court’s judgment, and it is unreasonable that the lower court’s punishment against the Defendants is too unreasonable, taking into account all the sentencing conditions, including the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, environment, motive and circumstance of the crime, and circumstances after the crime.

3. As such, the Defendants’ appeal is without merit, and all of them are dismissed pursuant to Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.