All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant B (Defendant B) did not have been involved in the act of Defendant C’s selling phiphones to F on July 26, 2017.

However, the lower court, in collusion with Defendant C, sold phiphones to F on July 26, 2017, in collusion with Defendant C.

As such, the court below erred by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2) The sentence of the lower court (one hundred months of imprisonment, additional collection) that is unfair in sentencing is too unreasonable.

B. The punishment of the lower court (Defendant A: Imprisonment with prison labor for a year and six months, additional collection, Defendant C: Imprisonment with prison labor for a year and two months, and additional collection) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the Defendant B’s assertion of mistake of facts, the following circumstances acknowledged by the record, namely, F, from the investigative agency to the court of the court below, stated that “The Defendant B provided KRW 9,50,000 in return for three small atmospheres to Defendant B and remitted them to Defendant C,” and the Defendant B received KRW 9,50,000 from F in the prosecutor’s investigation and delivered them to Defendant C.

It was also known that the additional transactions are conducted at the time.

Comprehensively taking account of the fact that Defendant B made a statement, Defendant B sold phiphones in collusion with Defendant C on July 26, 2017 to F.

The judgment of the court below is just, and there is no error of mistake as to the facts alleged by Defendant B.

B. As to each of the unfair arguments on sentencing, the lower court determined the punishment within a reasonable scope by fully taking into account the overall circumstances regarding the sentencing of the Defendants, and there is no circumstance to newly consider in the appellate court. Therefore, even considering the circumstances asserted by the Defendants on the grounds of appeal, the lower court’s punishment is too large and unreasonable.

3. As the Defendants’ appeal is without merit, the Defendants’ appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so ordered as per Disposition.