All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

An application for compensation by an applicant for compensation shall be dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., both types of punishment) of the lower court against the Defendants (e.g., imprisonment of one year for Defendant A and one year and six months for Defendant B) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The lower court, based on the favorable circumstances that the Defendant led to the confession of the instant crime, the Defendant’s health is not good, and the Defendant was punished twice due to the violation of the Road Traffic Act, and the Defendant committed the instant crime repeatedly for a long time, and committed the instant crime against the disadvantage that the entire amount of damage has not been recovered.

Even when considering the circumstances alleged by the Defendant as the grounds for appeal, the lower court appears to have determined the punishment within a reasonable scope, sufficiently taking into account all the circumstances regarding sentencing.

Furthermore, there are no special circumstances or changes in circumstances to change the sentencing of the lower court after the lower judgment.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

B. The lower court, based on the favorable circumstances that the Defendant led to the confession of the instant crime, the health of the Defendant, and the fact that there was no record of criminal punishment, determined a sentence by taking account of the following factors: (a) the instant crime was committed for a prolonged period; (b) the total amount of damage was not recovered; and (c) the method of the commission of the crime was poor

Even when considering the circumstances alleged by the Defendant as the grounds for appeal, the lower court appears to have determined the punishment within a reasonable scope, sufficiently taking into account all the circumstances regarding sentencing.

Furthermore, there are no special circumstances or changes in circumstances to change the sentencing of the lower court after the lower judgment.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

3. The applicant filed an application for compensation order with the Defendants for the payment of KRW 300 million, but both the Defendants and the victims filed an application for compensation order with the Defendants during the crime period.