All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Examining the reasoning of the judgment below as to the Defendants’ grounds of appeal in light of the records, it is justifiable to reverse the judgment of the court of first instance convicting the Defendants of the facts charged of this case on the grounds that there is no evidence of the crime, and to find the Defendants not guilty of the facts charged of this case on the grounds as stated in its reasoning, and there is no error of incomplete deliberation

2. The appellate court, which received the record of the grounds of appeal against Defendant C, shall, where the defendant does not have a defense counsel in the case requiring a defense counsel under Article 33(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, appoint a defense counsel and notify him of the receipt of the trial records without delay, and where a public defender is appointed under Article 33(3) and a public defender is appointed upon the request of the public defender under Article 33(2) prior to the lapse of the period for submitting the grounds of appeal, notify him of the receipt of the trial records (Article 156-2 of the Rules of Criminal Procedure), and protect the defendant’s right to receive the assistance of the defense counsel within the prescribed period

(See Supreme Court Decision 2008Do11213 Decided April 9, 2009, etc.). According to the records, in this case, which is not a requisite attorney-at-law under Article 33(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the lower court did not request the appointment of a defendant under Article 33(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act; however, on March 2, 2012, the lower court decided to appoint a public defender; notified the public defender of the receipt of the notification of the notification of the receipt of the notification; and the public defender submitted the public defender’s written opinion on March 16, 2012.

Thus, the court below shall select a state appointed defense counsel under Article 33 (3) of the Criminal Procedure Act.