All appeals by the Defendants and the Prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A (1) The entire crime committed under the initiative of Defendant A(1) through misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles was divided into four teams, and there is no responsibility for participating in the crime of another team because the organization of the team members and the timing of the crime, the distribution of profits, etc. by each team are different. However, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles, thereby finding the Defendant guilty of the crime of the third team that the Defendant affiliated with the fourth team did not participate.

(2) The lower court’s imprisonment (one year and eight months) against the Defendant claiming unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.

B. The lower court’s sentence against the Defendants on the assertion of unfair sentencing by Defendant B and C (Defendant B’s imprisonment with prison labor for one year and six months, and one year and eight months’ imprisonment with prison labor for Defendant C) is too unreasonable.

C. The lower court’s sentence against the prosecutor’s assertion of unreasonable sentencing against the Defendants is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the evidence duly examined and adopted by the court below as to Defendant A’s assertion of misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, the facts constituting the crime in the judgment of the court below shall be sufficiently recognized as facts constituting the crime in the judgment of the court below, on the grounds that all facts constituting the crime in the judgment of the court below were committed by the same methods, time and place as a whole according to G’s crime plan, and it shall be deemed that Defendant A is responsible for all the crimes in the judgment of the court below, and it cannot be found that

B. It is necessary to strictly punish the Defendants in light of the following: (a) examining the Defendants’ and the Prosecutor’s assertion of unfair sentencing; and (b) taking account of the fact that the Defendants’ instant crime of acquiring money from many unspecified victims is a serious organizational crime; and (c) most damage from the instant crime was not recovered.

However, the defendants depth the mistakes.