The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

The summary of the grounds for appeal (long-term 2 years, short-term 1 year) of the lower court is too unreasonable.

Judgment

Even if the defendant commits a crime as a juvenile under the age of 19, a protective disposition under the Juvenile Act for environmental adjustment and correction of character should be given priority, rather than criminal punishment.

And the defendant is recognized as having reached an agreement with some of the victims.

However, during the short period of time when the Defendant was under protection observation, the Defendant committed most of the instant crimes, and inflicted bodily injury on the accomplices who want to voluntarily surrenders.

In addition, the Defendant had been already subject to five-months and three-months of each juvenile reformatory and three-months of each juvenile reformatory and three-time protection and observation, etc. In particular, the Defendant was detained in the juvenile reformatory on March 31, 2015 and was subjected to a decision to temporarily release from the juvenile reformatory from the juvenile reformatory since June of the same year. In addition, the Defendant committed the instant crime from March of the same year after receiving a decision to temporarily release from the juvenile reformatory. In addition, the Defendant did not comply with the matters to be observed even during the previous observation period of protection and observation, and as a result, the risk assessment of juvenile delinquency was assessed as “the risk”.

In addition, as the defendant has already passed 18 years of age, he/she goes beyond the juvenile law.

In comprehensive consideration of this point, it is clear that the defendant cannot be released immediately by the suspension of execution, etc., and further, it is inevitable to sentence imprisonment as it is inappropriate to use the protective disposition under the Juvenile Act.

In addition, as long as the lower court’s punishment is viewed as such, it cannot be deemed unfair because it is too large to reverse it.

Therefore, the defendant's argument of sentencing is not accepted.

Thus, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, since there is no reason to appeal.