All appeals by the Defendants and the Prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The defendants' punishment (the defendant B's imprisonment for six months, the defendant C's imprisonment for eight months, the defendant D's imprisonment for one year and two months, and the confiscation) is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. All the Defendants are against themselves at the time of committing the instant crime.

Defendant

B and part of the mobile phones acquired by C were returned to the victims, and the defendant B was partly recovered from the joint crime by mutual agreement with some victims (the victims related to the acquisition of stolen property by the defendant C) in the trial of the party.

Defendant

D An agreement was reached by the original court with some victims, and the recovery of damage was made in part by further agreement with some victims in the first instance.

Such circumstances are favorable to the Defendants.

However, Defendant B and C conspired to purchase smartphones lost on the taxi in collusion with passengers, knowing that they are stolen goods, and acquired so-called tracess on the new wall.

Defendant

B, B, as above, the smartphone, which was acquired as above, was divided into Defendant D on the street of the new wall time in a fluence between the time and the number of hours.

Defendant

D As above, Defendant B, C, etc. acquired smartphones which are stolen from Defendant B, C, and disposed of them again to Chinese business operators.

Since the Defendants’ crime of this case is professionally organized and cannot be recovered from damage if it is not discovered, it is inevitably linked to larceny against smartphones, and embezzlement of possession. Therefore, social harm is not so much high that the crime is highly likely to occur.

Moreover, all the Defendants have the same criminal history.

In other words, Defendant B was already sentenced to two fines due to the acquisition of stolen goods.

Defendant

C was already sentenced to a fine and a suspended sentence of imprisonment with prison labor for the crime of acquiring stolen property.

Defendant

D is a crime of acquiring stolens.