All A and prosecutor appeals are dismissed.

A. The sentencing of Defendant A (five years of imprisonment) by the lower court is too unreasonable.

B. The lower court’s sentencing (two years and six months of imprisonment, and three years of suspended execution) (in respect of Defendant B) is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Defendant A’s determination on the assertion of unfair sentencing by Defendant A is an element of sentencing favorable to Defendant A, including the fact that Defendant A confessions all of the instant crimes and reflects on the assertion of unfair sentencing, and that the victim I’s damage was recovered and returned to the victim I.

However, each of the crimes of this case led by Defendant A, along with the victim H’s property theft and dangerous things, and the nature of the crime is not good. The Defendants planned to commit the crime by preparing the crime tool, etc. in advance. Defendant A repeatedly committed the crime of this case during the period of repeated crime for which one month has not passed since the release despite the past record of punishment due to special robbery, and taking into account all of the sentencing conditions indicated in the arguments of this case, such as Defendant A’s age, the background and process of the crime, the means and method of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence of the lower court equivalent to the lowest sentence of legal punishment within the scope of discretionary mitigation is too unreasonable.

Therefore, Defendant A’s assertion of unfair sentencing is rejected.

3. Each of the instant crimes committed by the prosecutor on the assertion of unfair sentencing regarding the prosecutor is not good, in light of the fact that Defendant B, jointly with Defendant B and C, stolen the victim H’s property and forcibly taken property by threatening the victim I with dangerous articles, and the Defendants committed the crime by preparing the crime tool, etc. in advance. However, it is not good that Defendant B recognized both of his mistake and is in profoundly against the victim, and the victims do not want punishment under the agreement with the victims.