All appeals by the Defendants and the Prosecutor are dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., both types of punishment) asserts that the sentencing of the lower court is too unreasonable, and the prosecutor asserts that the sentencing of the lower court against the Defendants is too uneasible.

2. Where there is no change in the sentencing conditions compared to the judgment of the court below, and the sentencing of the court below is not beyond the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). Circumstances asserted by the Defendants and public prosecutors as sentencing factors in this Court are already revealed to be circumstances that have already been discovered in the process of pleadings by the lower court, or that the lower court sufficiently considered in determining the Defendant’s punishment. There is no particular change in circumstances in the sentencing guidelines with the matters subject to sentencing after the lower judgment was sentenced.

Defendant

A asserted to the effect that he denies a part of the crime in the original court, but all facts constituting the crime have been recognized in this court, thereby against the mistake. However, it is difficult to view the original court’s punishment as a change in circumstances that could change.

In full view of the circumstances indicated by the lower court on the grounds of sentencing, such as the background and content of the instant crime, degree of the Defendants’ participation in the instant crime, degree of damage to the victim, etc., comprehensively taking into account the Defendants’ age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, motive, means and consequence of the instant crime, etc., and the conditions of sentencing as indicated in the record, and the scope of the recommended sentencing guidelines based on the sentencing guidelines, such as the circumstances after the instant crime, etc., the lower court’s sentencing against the Defendants was carried out within the reasonable scope of discretion, and cannot be deemed as unreasonable or unreasonable.

The Defendants and the prosecutor’s arguments are without merit.

3. The appeal filed by the Defendants and the prosecutor is without merit and all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.