The judgment below

Of them, the part against Defendant A shall be reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

Defendant .

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A’s punishment (five years of imprisonment, Nos. 1 through 4) by the lower court is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B’s punishment (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As the extreme example of the so-called “brupt violence,” Defendant A committed the crime of this case is very poor in the nature of the crime in light of the motive, pattern, risk, confinement time, and circumstances after the crime. The Defendant committed the crime without being subject to suspended execution, even though he was under suspended execution due to a special assault, and the Defendant appears to have obstructed fear to a dead citizen by putting the scrupt as if he was associated with the organization of violence. The Defendant was trying to commit the instant intimidation and attack the victim with heavy business rights, etc. for lending and borrowing of insurance vehicles, and thus, the crime is extremely poor in light of the motive, method, etc. of the crime.

On the other hand, the victim D, who committed a crime of special confinement, was unable to punish the defendant from the stage of investigation, was present at the court of the first instance and tried again to be present at the court of the first instance, and the crime of intimidation and intimidation seems to have led Q to commit a crime, and there is no benefit to the defendant, and the crime of intimidation and intimidation should be considered at the same time as the crime of special assault which became final and conclusive on October 13, 2016, which is favorable to the defendant.

In full view of the above circumstances and other circumstances as well as the sentencing conditions shown in the records and arguments such as the Defendant’s age, sex, and environment, the lower court’s sentence is somewhat unreasonable.

B. The sentencing of Defendant B is, based on the statutory penalty, discretionary judgment that takes place within a reasonable and appropriate scope by taking into account the factors constituting the conditions for sentencing as prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act.

However, the trial-oriented principle, which is taken by our criminal litigation law, is established.