The remainder, excluding a compensation order, shall be reversed.

Defendant

A, Defendant, and Defendant, who were punished by imprisonment for not less than three years and eight months.

A. Defendant A1) The Defendant suffered from mental illness, and even at the time of each of the instant crimes, such mental illness was in the state of mental and physical disability due to the above mental illness. 2) The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one year of imprisonment, and four years of confiscation) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B’s imprisonment (two years of imprisonment, confiscation) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the record of the judgment on the claim of mental and physical disability of Defendant A, it is recognized that Defendant A was diagnosed with mental illness such as alcohol use disorder and depression disorder in Defendant AN hospital and continued medical treatment.

However, in full view of the circumstances leading to each of the crimes of this case including the fact that Defendant A prepared to commit an act, such as the date drone, and stolen money and valuables in collaboration with Defendant B, and that even according to the medical records submitted by Defendant A, “I do not want to take an unlimited and unjustifiable responsibility for himself/herself,” and the circumstances leading to each of the crimes of this case, the process of the commission, the actions before and after the crime, the statement by Defendant A as to the crime of this case, etc., it does not seem that Defendant A did not have a weak state of ability to discern things or make decisions due to the above mental illness at the time of each of the crimes of this case. Accordingly, the above assertion by Defendant A is without merit

B. Considering the period, method, target, frequency, size, etc. of the Defendants’ determination on the Defendants’ assertion of unfair sentencing, there is a high possibility of criticism against the Defendants. Many victims suffered monetary damage due to the instant crime.

Defendants can be punished for the same kind of crime, and in particular, Defendant A committed each of the crimes in this case when they were committed again during the same repeated crime period.

However, the Defendants did not repeat the crime of this case while recognizing all of the crimes of this case.

The defendants are three at the trial.