The Prosecutor’s appeal against Defendant B and the Defendants’ appeal are all dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor on Defendant B (eight months of imprisonment) is too unhued and unfair.

B. Each sentence (Defendant A: Imprisonment with prison labor for one year and six months, and Defendant B: imprisonment for eight months) declared by the court below to the Defendants is too unreasonable.

2. As to the prosecutor’s judgment and the Defendants’ respective arguments, there is a need to strictly punish the instant crime inasmuch as it is not eradicated because it is a so-called “singing” crime, which is organized internationally and systematically against many and unspecified persons, and is an internationally organized crime that leads to a large number of victims, such as the Defendants’ confessions into the instant crime, and reflects the mistakes while leading to the Defendants to commit the instant crime, the first offender, and the victims’ agreement, and the instant crime was committed from the end of 2014 to March 2015. At the time of the prosecutor’s investigation, the Defendants were in charge of telephone counseling by taking part in the highly organized singing organization as in the instant case (at the time of the prosecutor’s investigation, Defendant A was to take part in the instant crime from the end of 2014 to the end of 2015.

In light of the circumstances where the Defendants participated during the participation period, as long as a considerable amount of damage was inflicted on the Defendants due to the commission of the criminal act by the sophishing organization, etc., the liability for the crime is grave, equity in sentencing with the same and similar cases, and the Defendants’ age, sex, environment, motive and background leading to the instant crime, means and consequence, etc., and all of the sentencing conditions stated in the records of the instant case and the previous theories, such as the circumstances after the commission of the instant crime, are deemed appropriate, and thus, the prosecutor and the Defendants’ assertion are without merit.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal against the defendant B and the defendants' appeal are without merit, and all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.