All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal by the Defendants is too unreasonable in light of the Constitutional Court’s decision on the process leading the Defendants to commit the instant crime and the relevant penal provisions, and the location of the massagemen who are not visually impaired and the difference between the places of massages for recovery from the route, etc. (a fine of KRW 4 million is imposed on the Defendants A and a fine of KRW 1.5 million is imposed on the Defendants C and E).

2. Although the demand for the service, such as helping or cutting down the marbry blood cycle, the supply of the visually impaired person who obtained the qualification as a marbrye increased rapidly, it is difficult to see that the value of punishment against the Defendants is significantly high in light of the process that the marbling by the visually impaired person becomes widely spread, and Defendant A and C are the primary offender. However, the size of the marbry treatment place operated by Defendant A is small and its operating period is considerably long, Defendant E committed the instant crime despite the suspension of indictment due to the violation of the Medical Service Act. Defendant E committed the instant crime even if he was subject to the suspension of indictment, at the same place on June 4, 2011, even if it was controlled by the act without qualification, and the supply of the visually disabled person who obtained the qualification as a marbrye, and thus, in light of the above circumstances and favorable circumstances, the circumstances of the instant crime or the business size, the motive and reason for sentencing of the Defendants, as well as other similar circumstances, and the motive and reason behind the instant crime.

3. If so, the Defendants’ appeal is without merit, and thus, it is in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.