All appeals by the Defendants and the Prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendants A (A) 1) The Defendant was guilty of the facts charged against the Defendant on a different premise, on the contrary that the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B) The lower court’s sentence (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable in light of the fact that, even if the sentencing was not so, the amount of damage caused by the phishing crime was returned to the victim.

2) Defendant BA’s misunderstanding of the facts (based on fraud) is erroneous in the misapprehension of the judgment that found Defendant A guilty of this part of the facts charged on a different premise, without having taken part in the criminal act of Bosing, even though the co-defendant A merely took part in the criminal act of licensing.

B) Even if the sentencing is not unfair, the court below’s punishment (one year of imprisonment and ten months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable in light of the following: (a) the amount of damage caused by the Bosing Crime was returned to the victim; and (b) the circumstances leading up to the victim K’s injury; and (c) the Defendant was assaulted by the above victim; and (d) the Defendant was committed as a substitute for the above crime; and (e) there was a family member to support the above crime in depth.

B. In addition, Defendant A (Defendant A) was actively involved in the crime by having the aforementioned C take the responsibility for collecting the singing, lending his sentiments to a place designated by the singing organization, etc., and sought another crime using the singishing crime, such as taking the money obtained by deception, and taking another action in the singishing crime. In light of the applicable law of the crime and the degree of participation, etc., the nature of the crime is somewhat weak.