The judgment below

Of them, the part on Defendant B shall be reversed.

Defendant

B Exemption from punishment for B

Defendant

A.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal against the defendants of the court below (defendant A: long-term imprisonment of 1 year and 6 months; short-term imprisonment of 10 months; Defendant B: long-term imprisonment of 5 months; short-term imprisonment of 3 months) is too unreasonable.

2. Review of the judgment ex officio (as to Defendant B), prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by Defendant B, Defendant B was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for a maximum term of one year and six months, with prison labor for special larceny, etc. at the Seoul Southern Southern District Court on January 9, 2018, and ten months with prison labor for a short term of ten months.

6. 8. 8. Recognizing the fact that the above judgment became final and conclusive, the above special larceny, etc. and the crime of this case, which became final and conclusive, are concurrent crimes by a group after Article 37 of the Criminal Act. As such, punishment shall be determined after examining whether to reduce or exempt punishment in consideration of equity and equity in cases where a judgment is rendered at the same time pursuant to Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act. Thus, the judgment of the court below where such measures

3. We examine the judgment on Defendant A’s assertion, and examine the circumstances that the court below rendered on the grounds of sentencing (the Defendant committed a second offense even though he had been subject to juvenile protective disposition several times for the same crime, committed a crime without any discrimination during a short period, and seems to have no awareness of any particular crime, and the Defendant took a considerable amount of the stolen cash as entertainment expenses, etc., it is inevitable to impose corresponding criminal punishment on the Defendant. Meanwhile, the Defendant’s act is against the Defendant’s life through a prison life, and the Defendant’s grow up under the Juvenile Act, the Defendant did not completely form personality as a juvenile under the Juvenile Act, the Defendant’s act was committed in collaboration with his accomplice at night, and the method of committing the crime was interviewed with, or threatened with, the victim’s property or committed a attempted crime.