All appeals by the Defendants and the Prosecutor are dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) argues that with respect to each sentence imposed by the court below on the Defendants, the Defendants are too unfasible and unfair, and the prosecutor asserts that it is too unfasible and unfair.

2. The judgment of the Defendants led to the confession of each of the instant crimes and are in violation of depth, and the victims did not actually suffer monetary damage due to the attempted crime of this case, and the Defendants seems to have little profits from the commission of the instant crime. The circumstances favorable to the Defendants are the circumstances.

However, the instant Bosing fraud crime, in which the Defendants participated, is a crime of deceiving money from many unspecified victims through a professional and intelligent method after sharing the roles of a large number of people according to a thorough plan, and the social harm is serious. In such a case, as such a crime takes place in a variety of ways, the participation of subordinate officers, such as recruitment books, withdrawal books, remittance books, face-to-face books, etc., not only is essential but also makes it difficult for them to detect superior officers, so it is necessary to punish subordinate officers.

In particular, Defendant A performed an important duty in the instant crime, such as showing the victims' direct contact with the victims, and acting as an employee of the Financial Supervisory Service and receiving cash directly, and Defendant A committed the instant crime on October 26, 2017, which was sentenced to imprisonment for 8 months and imprisonment for 2 years of suspension of execution on November 3, 2017 by the Daegu District Court, which was sentenced to imprisonment for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving Driving) at the Daegu District Court on October 26, 2017, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on November 3, 2017, and committed the instant crime. Furthermore, Defendant A committed the instant crime during the period of suspension of execution, and transferred the access media to receive compensation and transferred the access media (7 million won (amount of damage), and was not received from the victims. Therefore, Defendant A’s sentence of sentence is inevitable.

On the other hand, Defendant B is the case.