All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. The sentence of the judgment of the court of first instance (the sentence of the defendant A: one year of imprisonment and two years of suspended execution, 160 hours of social service, defendant B: four months of suspended execution and one year of suspended execution, and 80 hours of social service) against the defendant in the summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable;

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). In light of the foregoing legal doctrine, the following circumstances are favorable to the Defendant: (a) the Defendants were examined; (b) the Defendants recognized the instant crime; and (c) the Defendants deposited a certain amount of money for the victim in the first instance trial.

However, the crime of crime in the judgment of the court is that the defendants jointly or carried dangerous objects, etc., and the crime of violence, the method of violence, and the degree of injury inflicted on the victim, etc. are not exceptionally applied to the crime.

The defendants did not receive the statements from the victim, and the defendants did deep reflect.

It is difficult to see that full efforts have been made to recover damage.

As such, the court of first instance sentenced the suspension of the execution of imprisonment with labor and the community service order, which considerably falls short of the prosecutor’s old sentence, by taking account of the favorable circumstances for the Defendants, even though the unfavorable conditions to the Defendants were significant.

Furthermore, in full view of the following circumstances: (a) there is no change in the sentencing conditions compared with the first instance court because a new sentencing data has not been submitted in the trial; and (b) the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive and background of the crime, means and consequence of the crime; and (c) the circumstances after the crime were committed, the sentencing of the court of the first instance cannot be deemed unfair because the sentencing of the court goes beyond the reasonable scope of discretion.

3. The appeal by the defendant for the decision is with reason.