All appeals filed by A and prosecutor are dismissed.

A. The punishment sentenced by the court below to Defendant A (10 months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. Each sentence (Defendant A: Imprisonment with prison labor for 10 months, Defendant B: imprisonment for 8 months, 2 years of suspended execution, Defendant C: imprisonment for 8 months of suspended execution, 2 years of suspended execution, 2 years of suspended execution, and confiscation) that the lower court sentenced the Defendants are too unfasible and unfair.

2. Under our criminal litigation law, which takes the trial-oriented principle and direct principle, it is reasonable to respect the determination of sentencing in cases where there exists no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The instant crime takes part in the roles of the Defendants, Defendant C is driving a vehicle, Defendant A is broken off a glass window, and has broken off a precious metal and stolen precious metal. Defendant B intrudes upon the upper bank operated by the victim and stolen the precious metal, in light of the circumstances of the crime, method of the crime, etc., and the amount of damage exceeds KRW 100,000,00,000, and Defendant A received several criminal records and records of criminal punishment twice as well as the changes in the circumstances that appear to have been led by the victim of the instant crime, but both the Defendants and the Defendant C appear to have agreed on the change in circumstances that were disadvantageous to the victim’s.