All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (ten months in prison by each of the defendants) is too unreasonable.

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the judgment of the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect them. Although the sentence of the first instance falls within the reasonable scope of discretion, it is desirable to reverse the judgment of the first instance court solely on the ground that it is somewhat different from the opinion of the appellate court, and to refrain from imposing a sentence that does not differ

(Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). In light of the aforementioned legal principles, there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the lower court’s failure to submit new materials for sentencing in the trial and the fact that there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the lower court’s reasoning. In full view of all of the reasons for sentencing as stated by the lower court and the reasons for sentencing specified in the records and arguments of this case, it is not recognized that the lower court’s sentencing against the Defendants exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion because

3. As such, the Defendants’ appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, since all of the appeals are without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.