All appeals filed by B and prosecutor are dismissed.

A. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, such as the statement of the victim, etc., the court below found the Defendants guilty of the charges concerning special robbery, special robbery, and mutual conflict, but there is an error of law by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence of an unreasonable sentencing (Defendant B) imposed by the lower court on the Defendant is too unlimited and unfair.

2. Determination

A. In light of the difference between the first instance court and the appellate court’s method of evaluating the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance in light of the substance of the first instance judgment and the evidence duly examined by the first instance court, or in exceptional cases where it is deemed that maintaining the first instance court’s judgment on the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance is significantly unfair considering the results of the first instance court’s examination and the results of additional evidence examination conducted by the time of closing argument in the appellate court, the appellate court may not reverse the first instance court’s judgment on the ground that the first instance court’s judgment on the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance is different from the appellate court’s judgment (see Supreme Court Decision 2008Do7917, Jan. 30, 2009). Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the aforementioned legal principles, closely examining the records and records of the instant case, the lower court’s determination on the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance court is clearly erroneous or unreasonable.