The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for twelve years.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, by misapprehending the legal principles and mistake of facts, did not prevent the robbery of this case, and the Defendant committed robbery.

Even if the victim was not injured, the victim was not injured.

The investigative agency, without showing the photograph of another suspect, displayed the victim seven years ago, and the victim specified the victim as the offender. The victim's statement was made without complying with the procedure for identifying the offender, and it is difficult to believe that it is not consistent with the procedure for identifying the offender.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the robbery of this case is erroneous in the misunderstanding of facts or legal principles.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (14 years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant.

According to the records of this case, the defendant was sentenced to four months of imprisonment with prison labor on October 15, 2009 at the Seoul Western District Court on April 13, 2008 for the crime of injury committed on April 13, 2008, and the above judgment can be recognized as the facts finalized on November 10, 209.

The crime of this case was committed not only before each judgment becomes final and conclusive, but also the crime of bodily injury (a group deadly weapon, etc.) as to the crime of this case was committed prior to the judgment of the court below. The crime of this case and each of the above crimes for which the judgment of this case became final and conclusive are concurrent crimes in relation to the crime of this case after Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and in accordance with Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act, a punishment for the crime of this case shall be sentenced by considering equity in cases where the crime of this case

In this regard, the judgment of the court below is all true, and only Article 37 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a group deadly weapon, etc.) stipulates the crime as a criminal record of the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and the crime of injury is not specified as a criminal record, and the part of the judgment of the court below regarding the handling of light crimes