특수절도등
All parts of the judgment of the court below against Defendant A, F, and S shall be reversed.
Defendant
Punishment A shall be punished by imprisonment for a maximum term.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The Defendants’ sentence imposed on the Defendants [(i) Defendant A: imprisonment with prison labor for a maximum of one year and six months (No. 1 year and one year, one year and six months, one year and six months, one year and six short term (No. 2), Defendant B: imprisonment with prison labor for a maximum of one year and four months (No. 1), three years of suspension of execution, three years of protection, observation of community service order, 240 hours (No. 1) with prison labor for a maximum of one year and four months; (iii) Defendant E: 3 years of suspension of execution and three years of protection, surveillance of community service order, 160 hours of community service order (No. 1); (5) Defendant F: 8 months of suspension of execution, and 160 hours of community service order (No. 1), imprisonment with prison labor for a maximum of one year and six months (No. 2 years); and (1) years and one year and six months of a short term of one (No. 15 million won).
B. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor of the lower judgment against the Defendants is too unfasible and unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. Before the judgment on the grounds for appeal against the Defendants in the ex officio judgment on the grounds for appeal against Defendant A and F, this Court tried by combining each appeal case against the lower judgment. Each of the offenses of the lower judgment is a concurrent crime under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and a single sentence should be imposed in accordance with Article 38 of the Criminal Act. In this regard, the lower judgment cannot be exempt from reversal.
B. Each of the instant crimes committed against Defendants B, C, E, and S is unreasonable, and the Defendants took part in their roles and take part in their roles over a short period of time and thus, the nature of the crime is not good. The Defendants committed each of the instant crimes without being involved in the record of juvenile protective disposition, etc. even though they had received the same kind of crime, and in particular, Defendant B, and C appears to have played a leading and direct role in the process of committing each of the instant crimes.