Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part of the case against Defendant A and the judgment of the court of second instance against Defendant A are reversed.

Defendant

A. Imprisonment.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. At the time of the crime of the first instance judgment of the Defendant and the respondent for the attachment order, the Defendant and the respondent for the attachment order (hereinafter “Defendant”) were in a state of lacking the ability to discern things or make decisions under the influence of alcohol.

2) The sentence of the lower court’s sentence against the Defendant alleged unfair sentencing (No. 1: imprisonment with prison labor for three years, etc., and imprisonment with prison labor for six months) is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor 1) The sentence of the lower court’s sentence against Defendant A and the sentence of the first instance court’s sentence against Defendant M (a prison term of three years and a suspended sentence of four years, etc.) against Defendant M are too uneasible and unreasonable.

2) There are special circumstances in which disclosure of personal information against the illegal Defendants exempted from disclosure disclosure disclosure order may not be disclosed.

It is unreasonable that the first instance court exempted the disclosure notification order even though it is not possible to view it.

3) Inasmuch as the dismissal of the request for attachment order is recognized to be the risk of recidivism by Defendant A, it is unreasonable for the first instance court to dismiss the request for attachment order of this case.

2. Determination on the part of the case of the defendant

A. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for ex officio appeal.

The judgment of the first instance against the Defendants is rendered by the judgment of the court below, and the second instance against the Defendants A, and the Prosecutor filed each appeal against the Defendants, and this court decided to hold concurrent hearings with respect to each of the above appeal cases. Among the judgment of the first instance, each of the crimes against the Defendants A and the crimes of the second judgment against the Defendants in the concurrent relation to the concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and one of the crimes of Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act should be sentenced pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. Thus, the part of the judgment of the court below against the Defendant A and the second judgment cannot be maintained.

However, despite the above reasons for reversal ex officio, Defendant A’s mental and physical unfortunate arguments and the public prosecutor’s sentencing for Defendant M., and Defendants.