1. As to Defendant B, the lower court convicted Defendant B of the instant facts charged on the grounds stated in its reasoning.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine

Defendant

Examining the following circumstances: B’s age, character and conduct, intelligence and environment, relationship with victims, motive, means and consequence of the commission of the crime, and the circumstances after the commission of the crime, etc., the lower court’s sentencing, even if considering the circumstances asserted in the grounds of appeal, cannot be deemed significantly unfair.

2. The lower court found Defendant A guilty of the instant facts charged against Defendant A on the grounds as indicated in its reasoning.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the intentional murder of robbery, co-principal, and forced conduct.

Defendant

Examining various circumstances, including A’s age, character and conduct, intelligence and environment, relationship with victims, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court’s sentencing that sentenced 40 years of imprisonment is extremely unfair even when considering the circumstances asserted in the grounds of appeal.

3. Therefore, all appeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.