A. The facts of the theft of Article 2-A (1) of the judgment of the court below as stated in the judgment of the court below are not the facts that the defendant A alone committed the theft of Article 2-A (1) of the judgment of the court below, and the facts of the theft of Article 2-C (1) of the judgment of the court below are not the fact that the defendant B committed it, and the facts of the theft of Article 2-C (2) of the judgment of the court below are not the fact that the defendant B attempted to steal it, but the person who received it at the time was able to do so, and the facts of the theft of Article 2-C (3) of the judgment of the court below are not one million won but 6.5 million won. The second-C (4) of the judgment of the court below as stated in the judgment of the court below are not the fact that the defendant B committed the crime of the theft of Article 2-C (1) of the judgment of the court below and it is erroneous in

B. In light of the developments leading up to the instant crime and the present situation under which the Defendants are faced with, the sentence of unfair sentencing (Defendant A and Defendant B: 1 year and June, and 2 years of imprisonment) against the Defendants is too unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below as to Defendant B’s assertion of mistake of facts, namely, ① Defendant A stated in the court of the court below that Defendant B conducted the theft of Article 2(a)(1) of the judgment of the court below together with Defendant B, which also led to the confession by the prosecutor’s office of the above theft. Defendant B also testified that Defendant B’s legal statement in the court of the court below was consistent with this, ② Defendant B stated that there was a fact between the AC marriage type as stated in Article 2(c)(1) of the judgment of the court below at the police station, ② Defendant B made a statement in the CCTV recorded at the time of recording at the time that the above Defendant was located at the scene (see Articles 276, 277 of the evidence record), and the statements in the court of the court of the court of the court of the court of the court of the