Defendant

F. The term of imprisonment of 7 years, the term of imprisonment of 4 years, Defendant B, C, D, and E.

A. Defendant F1) In fact, Defendant F1 did not intentionally add the victim Q Q, knife in a knife that Q Q Q was put by the Defendant during his body match, and the Defendant did not have the victim R in a knife.

2) The sentence sentenced by the lower court (7 years of imprisonment, confiscation) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant A, B, C, D, and E’s sentence (two years of imprisonment, confiscation) imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.

(c)

(1) Defendant A, B, C, D, and E knew that the victims had money in the hotel room.

As can be seen, the above Defendants attempted to commit robbery.

It is reasonable to see that the court below found the above Defendants not guilty of robbery, which is the primary charge, was erroneous in the misapprehension of facts.

2) The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendants is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The prosecutor of the judgment ex officio changed the facts charged in the indictment of this case as stated in "1.1. Defendant F" and the column for "1.2, C, D, and E, the primary facts charged," and the column for "1.2. Preliminary facts charged," and applied for the amendment of the indictment to add "2. Defendant A, B, C, D, and E," as the primary facts charged, with respect to Defendant A, C, D, and E as stated in the column for "2."

However, the defendant F's assertion of mistake of facts is still subject to the judgment of this court, and this is examined.

B. Defendant F alleged that Defendant F had the same purport as the allegation in this part of the lower judgment, and the lower court stated in detail the judgment on this issue, and intentionally bucks and bucks of the victim Q Q.