All appeals by the Defendants and the Prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A: Imprisonment with prison labor (three years and six months) imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B (1) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles (the fact of injury by robbery) only conspired to steal the property of A and the victim, and there was no conspiracy to forcibly take them into account, and there was waiting at the time of committing the robbery and injury by robbery, and thus, it was not possible to anticipate the result of the injury. (2) The punishment sentenced by the lower court of unfair sentencing (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

C. Prosecutor: The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendants is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles by Defendant B

A. The lower court determined as follows: (a) the Defendant and A explained the legal principles on the criteria recognized as violence against robbery and the intent of joint processing; and (b) the Defendant and A conspired to commit a brue crime against the brue by opening a parked vehicle or impairing another’s residence without any property anticipated; and (c) the Defendant and A conspired to commit a brue crime against the brue due to the difficulty in physical coloring the object of the crime; and (d) the Defendant and A discovered the victim who was mixed with the object of the crime by using the vehicle while checking the object of the crime; and (c) there was a will to seize the victim clearly; (c) the victim got out of the investigative agency to the effect that “the brue and the brue flue flue flue flue flue flue flue flue flue flue flue flue flue flue flue flue f.”