Of the judgment of the court below, the part concerning Defendant B shall be reversed.

Defendant

B shall be punished by imprisonment for a year and two months.

(b).

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence of the lower court (the first instance court: 2 years of suspended sentence of 10 months, etc., 2 months of suspended sentence of imprisonment, 10 months of imprisonment, etc.) by Defendant B is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant J 2’s sentence (one year of suspended sentence of six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. We examine ex officio the grounds for appeal by Defendant B prior to the judgment on the grounds of appeal by Defendant B.

Defendant

As to B, the judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance rendered each judgment, and Defendant B filed each appeal against them, and this court decided to hold the above two appeals together for a new trial.

Defendant

Each of the crimes in the first and second judgments with respect to B is concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and thus, one sentence should be imposed pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. As such, the part concerning Defendant B among the judgment of the court below in the first and second instances cannot be maintained as it is.

B. The second instance court determined the Defendant J’s punishment as above by taking account of the favorable and unfavorable circumstances to Defendant J, as well as the circumstances favorable to Defendant J.

In full view of all the circumstances that are conditions for sentencing in this Court, the sentencing of the second instance court exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

There is no special change in circumstances that could change the punishment of the second court.

In addition, even if Defendant J’s age, the environment, the background and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime were committed, the sentencing of the lower court No. 2 exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion because the sentencing of the lower court is too unreasonable, in full view of the reasons revealed in the proceedings of the instant case.

It does not appear.

Defendant

J’s argument of sentencing is without merit.

3. As the judgment of the court below on the part concerning Defendant B is reversed ex officio, the judgment of the court below on the grounds that there is a ground for reversal of the above authority, and without omitting judgment on each of the unfair arguments by Defendant B, Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act.