All appeals by the Defendants and the Prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Defendant A’s appeal is dissatisfied with the judgment of the court below and filed an appeal on January 15, 2020. According to the records, Defendant A and the state appointed defense counsel appointed by the court of the first instance on February 7, 2020 did not submit the written notification of the receipt of the trial record within 20 days from the deadline for submitting the statement of grounds of appeal, while Defendant A and the state appointed by this court did not state the grounds for appeal in the petition of appeal.

On the other hand, the private defense counsel appointed by the defendant A and the public defense counsel after receiving the notification of the receipt of the notification of the receipt of the trial records was received on February 7, 2020 by the defendant A and the public defense counsel received the notification of the receipt of the trial records around 9:56, and around 10:32, and the notification of the appointment of the private defense counsel

In the necessary attorney-at-law case, the appellate court appointed a public defender and notified the defendant and the public defender of the receipt of the notification of the trial record, and then the appellate court revokes the appointment of a public defender as the defendant appoints a private defense counsel, it does not need to give the same notification again to the private defense counsel. In such a case, the period for submitting the grounds for appeal shall be calculated from the date when the public defense counsel or the defendant received the notification of the receipt of the notification of the trial record (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Order 2015Do10651, Nov. 22, 201

On March 5, 2020, the Do Governor and the latter filed a statement of grounds for appeal on March 5, 2020, claiming unfair sentencing, but it is difficult to regard it as legitimate grounds

However, even when considering the sentencing of the judgment below ex officio, Defendant A paid additional damages to the victim AI, AJ, and the victim AI, AO, and AJ request the preference. Co-Defendant B’s compensation for damages to the victim AE and AL, and the above victims request the preference. However, the judgment of the court below is discretionary when comprehensively taking into account the conditions of the sentencing and the form of the sentencing.