The judgment below

The parts against the Defendants are reversed.

Defendant

A Imprisonment of 2 years and 6 months and fine of 300,000 won.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

The Defendants appealed from the lower judgment based on the initial mistake of facts, misapprehension of legal doctrine, and unfair sentencing. However, on the 6th trial day of the first instance trial, the Prosecutor revoked the previous assertion of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles among the grounds for appeal, when the Prosecutor changed the part of the facts charged in the instant case to “violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint conflict), violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (

The sentence of the lower court (Defendant A: Imprisonment with prison labor of three years and six months and fine of 300,000 won, Defendant B’s imprisonment with prison labor of three years and six months) is too unreasonable.

In order to reach the trial for ex officio determination, the part concerning “injury by robbery” among the names of the crimes against the Defendants was “violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint homicide), Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint injury), special larceny, and Article 337 and Article 30 of the Criminal Act” in the applicable provisions of Articles 6, 2(2) and (1)3 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, Article 350(1)3 of the Criminal Act, Article 2(2) and (1)3 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, Article 2(1)3 of the Criminal Act, Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 331(2) and (1) of the Criminal Act, and Article 331(1) of the Criminal Act, as stated in paragraph (1) of the same Article, and this court applied for amendments to a bill of indictment as stated

Accordingly, the judgment of the court below that sentenced a single punishment by treating the modified parts and the remaining criminal facts in the judgment of the court below as concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Code cannot be maintained in this respect.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendants' assertion of unfair sentencing, on the ground of the above reasons for ex officio reversal, and it is again decided as follows.

[The reasons for the judgment of multiple court] The summary of criminal facts and evidence is recognized by the court.