All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the lower court’s punishment (for each of the Defendants, eight months of imprisonment and two years of suspended sentence against Defendant B) against the Defendants is too unreasonable.

2. As to Defendant A, even though the defendant was found to have committed a crime for the first time and committed a mistake, the amount of profit that the defendant actually acquired, the degree of participation of the defendant in the crime, and any damage to the victim is not recovered. In full view of all the sentencing data appearing in the defendant’s age, character and conduct, and environment records, the sentence of the court below is deemed to be excessively unreasonable.

Defendant

As to B, the court below did not have any favorable condition that the Defendant agreed with the victim, that the health of the Defendant is not good, and that the Defendant did not actively direct or lead the commission of the crime, but most profits from the crime of this case were used as the funds of the Defendant’s operating company, that the Defendant was punished by a fine for the same kind before the crime of this case was committed, and that all kinds of sentencing materials appearing in the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, and environment records of this case were taken into account, it is not recognized that the sentence of the court below is excessively unreasonable.

Defendant

C As to C, although the defendant did not have much the amount of profit actually acquired due to the crime of this case and deposited 2 million won in the future of the victim, the degree of participation is not less than that of the victim, the defendant was sentenced twice before and after the crime of this case was committed by the same criminal record as before and after the crime of this case, and by deceiving another removal business operator with the same contents as before and after the crime of this case (However, since the judgment was finalized after the crime of this case, it is also a reason favorable to the defendant pursuant to the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act), the defendant did not reach an agreement with the victim, and the defendant's age, character, and behavior