Of them, the part regarding Defendant E, excluding compensation order, shall be reversed.

Defendant

E shall be in 10 months of imprisonment.

A. The sentence of the lower court (one-year imprisonment and eight-year imprisonment for each of the Defendants) is too unreasonable.

B. The prosecutor of the lower court’s sentence (one year of imprisonment with prison labor and eight months of short-term) is deemed to be too unhutiled and unfair.

2. The judgment of the court below ex officio with respect to Defendant E’s appeal was a juvenile under Article 2 of the Juvenile Act when the judgment of the court below was pronounced in FZ. However, since the age of 19 was reached in the first instance, the judgment of the court below that reduced the punishment pursuant to Article 60(2) of the Juvenile Act was no longer maintained.

3. We examine the defendant C’s appeal and the prosecutor’s allegation as to the prosecutor’s appeal.

The crime of this case committed by the defendant in collusion with other joint defendants in committing or attempted a crime of "the second son's son's identity theft of internal property of a parked vehicle", used a stolen victim's credit card to purchase a name product, food expenses, accommodation expenses, etc. The victim AE has stolen other cash, which is the victim AE, which is a victim between the line and the next line, and requested AR to inform the personal information of his mother A Q, and used it to pay a mobile phone small amount by taking advantage of it. It also acquired money additionally from the victim AJ AJ to the victim AJ by taking advantage of the transfer of the status of AK, such crime is very poor in light of the contents, circumstances, and frequency of the crime, etc., and is very poor, and is very unusual and very heavy, and the damage was not recovered, and the defendant was not received from a considerable number of victims, and the defendant received a protective disposition several times.

On the other hand, the fact that the defendant acknowledges and reflects the crime of this case, the defendant partially restored the damage with other co-defendants, the victims do not want the punishment of the defendant, the defendant is a juvenile, and the defendant is subject to criminal punishment.