Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for ten months and by imprisonment for one year and two months, respectively.

2. Considering the fact that the Defendants committed the instant crime is not good, and that the Defendants committed the instant crime again during the period of repeated crime even though they had the same criminal record at multiple times, strict punishment against the Defendants is needed.

However, in light of the fact that the Defendants were in depth divided into their mistakes, that the Defendants agreed with some victims, and that Defendant A agreed additionally with some victims when they were in the first instance trial, the balance of sentencing with other accomplices, and the age, sex and environment of the Defendants, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment against the Defendants is too unreasonable, and thus, the Defendants’ above assertion is reasonable.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the defendants' appeal is with merit, and the judgment below is reversed and it is again decided as follows.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts charged and the summary of the evidence recognized by the court is identical to the facts stated in the corresponding column of the judgment of the court below, and thus, they are quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant legal provisions of the Criminal Act and Articles 347(1) and 30 of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of punishment (a fraudulent point), Articles 352, 347(1), and 30 of the Criminal Act, and the choice of imprisonment, respectively;

1. Article 35 of the Criminal Act for aggravated repeated crimes;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the same Act for the increase of concurrent crimes;