All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for four years and by imprisonment for three years.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant B (the special robbery in the judgment of the court of first instance) did not constitute a conspiracy of robbery with A, L, and robbery. The above Defendant purchased a knife, wall, and Make used for committing a special robbery and driven a vehicle used for committing a crime. However, the above knife and make are purchased for the purpose of larceny, regardless of robbery, and the knife and make are merely a knife by A’s request, regardless of robbery, and the knife and knife were used for the purpose of larceny, and the knife were cut off with A, etc. and parked at the vicinity of the place where the crime was committed, and the knife was parked with A, etc. after the knife and the site were cut down. Although there was no reason to reject the credibility of the statement in the court of second instance, the court below determined that the above Defendant erred by misapprehending the facts, and thus, the court below erred by misapprehending the above Defendant’s duty of robbery against A, etc.

B. The Prosecutor (the first instance judgment)’s sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendants (the Defendants A: imprisonment with prison labor for four years) is too unfluent and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Before the judgment on the grounds for appeal ex officio, prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal of ex officio, the prosecutor changed the name of the defendants against the larceny in the trial room from "violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes" to "Habitual special larceny", and applied for the amendment of an indictment to add "a withdrawal of applicable provisions" under Article 5-4(1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, and the same is subject to the judgment by the court.