The judgment below

Part concerning Defendant A and C shall be reversed.

Defendant

A Imprisonment with prison labor for one year, and for one year, for Defendant C.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The punishment imposed by the court below against Defendant A (unfair punishment) is too unreasonable. The punishment imposed by the court below against Defendant A (a year and six months of imprisonment, confiscation, and collection of KRW 160,000,000) is too unreasonable.

B. As to the crime of special larceny in this case (with respect to the crime of special larceny), Defendant C was aware of the situation of H et al. after the crime by taking into account the trends of Defendant C’s imprisonment without prison labor prior to the crime, and thus, it cannot be viewed as a co-principal of special larceny as there is no choice but to share the act of commission in collusion with Defendant B, D and special larceny. Although Defendant B did not have any opinion on the specific crime plan from Defendant B, it was not entirely foreseeable that Defendant B stolen the iron safe containing money in collaboration with Defendant D, even though it was not anticipated that Defendant B would have stolen it, Defendant C was recognized as a co-principal of the special larceny and convicted Defendant C of the crime of this case. 2) The judgment of the court below erred in the misapprehension of legal principles and misapprehension of legal principles, which sentenced Defendant C to the punishment of imprisonment with prison labor (a two years, confiscation and confiscation, and collection of penalty of KRW 927,00,000).

(In particular, the purchase price for benz vehicles shall be KRW 80,000,000, not KRW 30,000, not KRW 30,000 in connection with the calculation of the surcharge, and shall be reflected therein).

1) In the case of a comprehensive crime against Defendant B (guilty of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles and unreasonable sentencing) or misunderstanding of legal principles (with respect to the acquittal part of reasons in the original judgment), the part that the Defendant did not participate in the crime also bears the criminal responsibility as to the part of the crime committed by the accomplices. However, the part that the Defendant did not participate in the crime is after the Defendant C stolen the period prior to August 2009 and the imprisonment without prison labor, prior to his involvement, prior to his involvement in each of the crimes committed in the instant sports promotion betting tickets, and the crime committed in the gambling room.