All appeals filed by B and prosecutor are dismissed.

A. Defendant B 1) Of the part found by the lower court guilty of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles (the part concerning the crime of special robbery), there is no fact that the Defendant conspired with Co-Defendant A and I to commit a special robbery, or shared with them, and ② Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint confinement), with regard to the fact that the Defendant entered the scene after Co-Defendant A and L had already entered the scene, and the cards used at the site at the time were confirmed to be not “defensive card,” thereby helping the victims escape from confinement. However, there was no fact that the lower court detained the victims jointly with Co-Defendant A, Ltd. on the part of the charges. Nevertheless, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal principles on finding them guilty of all the charges, or by misapprehending the legal principles on special robbery and the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint confinement), thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment (1) as to ① the crime of robbery and the crime of assault and threat, etc. (2) the degree of the crime of assault and threat, including the above special robbery, and the crime of assault and punishment of the victim.

(2) The sentence imposed by the lower court (two years and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor 1) mistake of facts (the Defendants are not guilty in the reasoning).