Kirk was present during all six robberies, and each of them shared in the profits. One of the robberies resulted in theft of cash and cigarettes valued at $10,000.
Some of the robberies involved members of the gang holding victims at gunpoint and threatening to shoot them, holding victims in a store room while robbing the dairy, and robbing a group of four adults and one child in their home.
Another robbery involved an offender entering a victim's home with a knife and threatening to stab him.
Both women pleaded guilty after receiving sentence indications to six charges of being involved in the robberies. Vaeafisi was sentenced to four years in prison and Kirk received 10 months home detention.
With the leave of the Solicitor-General, the Crown appealed against those sentences, claiming they were wrong in principle and manifestly inadequate.
In his appeal decision, Justice Toogood of the Auckland High Court said the sentencing judge "erred materially" in his approach to sentencing.
The judge allowed "overly generous deductions" from the adjusting sentence starting point, among other things, Justice Toogood said.
Justice Toogood said the sentencing judge was "far too lenient" in determining the adjusted starting point, taking in the totality of the offending, particularly considering the home invasion incident could attract a starting point of seven years on its own.
"Protection must be afforded to ordinary citizens in their homes or out in the street at night," he said.
"There can be no doubt that serious offending against shopkeepers and service station attendants, particularly at night, is far too prevalent. People who are often alone in their business premises at night are particularly vulnerable and must be protected also."
Justice Toogood said there was a serious risk potential victims would take the law into their own hands and begin arming themselves for protection, which would increase violence and "unacceptable" risk to the public.
The judge also erred in sympathetically accepting a submission by defence lawyers that the robberies needed to be seen in the context of robberies carried out for reasons of financial desperation and where the actual financial return to the offenders was "relatively modest".
"Poverty and social malaise, such as drug addiction, can never justify terrorising ordinary citizens in their own homes or places of work," Justice Toogood said.
"The absence of a commercial motive in these robberies amounts to a lack of an aggravating factor, rather than the presence of a mitigating factor."
Justice Toogood said the judge "erred seriously" in his sentencing.
He dismissed the appeal against Kirk's sentencing for special circumstances, including that she had already served a third of her sentence, and that she would benefit from detention leave allowing her to return to the workplace.
He allowed the appeal against Vaeafisi's sentence, and reimposed the sentence of five years and six months imprisonment.
