Of them, the part on Defendant F is reversed.

Defendant

F. A person shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than six months.

except that this judgment.

A. Defendant F unreasonable sentencing: The lower court’s imprisonment (two years of suspended execution, etc. in six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable

Defendant

F was the ground for appeal, such as misconception of facts and misapprehension of legal principles that there was no causation between Defendant F’s act and the result of injury, and that there was no causation. However, the above argument was explicitly withdrawn on the second trial date of the trial.

B. Defendant G1) misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles and co-defendants’ acts do not constitute confinement. The Defendant, as well as co-defendants of the lower court and co-defendants of the lower court, did not have conspired to commit the instant crime, and did not essentially contribute to the instant crime, it cannot be deemed that they are co-principals of the instant crime. The Defendant cannot be punished as a crime of bodily injury resulting from an aggravated punishment on the ground that there was no likelihood of predicting the significant outcome of the instant crime. 2) The sentence of the lower court of unfair sentencing (one year of suspended sentence in six months) is

2. Determination

A. The Defendant’s argument regarding Defendant F’s assertion is consistent with the awareness of the fact that the instant conduct was committed by the victims through group hosting opened by B, and followed the scene of the criminal conduct by accomplices, and the Defendant notified the same motive of the crime through text messages, etc. to the same department, and taken a photograph of the knee and knee that the victim knee and knee and knee, and transmitted the same motive to the same department. As such, given that the nature of the crime is not weak, it is necessary to take strict responsibility corresponding thereto.

However, in the case of a party, the fact that the defendant led to the confession and reflects on the crime, there is no criminal record, and that all victims of this case did not want the punishment by mutual consent with the victim H during the trial of the party, shall be considered as favorable to the defendant, and the age, career, character and conduct, environment and crime of the defendant are committed.