The Defendants’ appeal is dismissed.

In full view of various sentencing conditions shown in the records and arguments of this case including the fact that Defendants A repeatedly committed the same kind of crime during the short term, Defendant A committed the same crime during the repeated crime period, Defendant A did not make efforts to recover damage, Defendant B did not have been sentenced to criminal punishment for the same kind of crime, and Defendant B did not make efforts to recover damage, even if considering that Defendant B deposited the amount of damage that has reached the first instance judgment, it is inappropriate for the lower court’s punishment (Defendant A: Defendant A: Defendant 1 and June, Defendant B’s imprisonment, and Defendant B: Defendant B’s imprisonment with prison labor for an excessive amount of damage) under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. Thus, the appeal by the Defendants is dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.