All appeals filed by the Defendants and the prosecutor against the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendants (2), B, C, E, and F: 2 years of suspended sentence of one year, and Defendant G: 3 years of suspended sentence of one year and six years of suspended sentence of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The above sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below against the Defendants is too unhued and unjust.

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the judgment of the first instance court on the assertion of unfair sentencing by the Defendants and the prosecutor, and the sentencing of the first instance court is not beyond the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable

Therefore, even though the sentence of the first instance court falls within the reasonable scope of discretion, it is desirable to reverse the judgment of the first instance court for the sole reason that it is somewhat different from the opinion of the appellate court to refrain from imposing a sentence that is not different from that of the first instance court.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). The lower court, as indicated in its reasoning, determined the sentence in consideration of both the favorable and unfavorable circumstances for the Defendants. The lower court did not change the sentencing conditions of the lower court on the grounds that the new sentencing data was not submitted in the appellate trial. In full view of all the sentencing conditions of the instant pleadings, including the Defendants’ age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, the background and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, it cannot be deemed that the lower court’s punishment is too heavy or unreasonable.

Therefore, the Defendants and the prosecutor’s argument of unfair sentencing cannot be accepted.

3. The appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor in conclusion is groundless, and all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.