The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

As to the summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts), ① Defendants, F, and H are taking part in their criminal acts by falsity.

The Defendants, public offenders F, and H planned to capture E, a bond broker, to take the property by force.

In full view of the following facts: (a) there was a reason to kill the victim to conceal the crime against the victim; (b) there was no reason to kill the victim from the victim as alleged by the defendant B; (c) there was no reason to do so until the N in Gunsan-si; (b) furthermore, the Defendants’ daily activity was a fluorcing tool to the extent sufficient to store people; (d) the movement of the Defendants’ daily operation and hot spring, or the house of the victim was merely a situation after the instant crime was committed; and (e) reasonable general public would have to think that they were dead in the same situation as the victim; and (b) the Defendants’ crime of murder may be sufficiently recognized.

With respect to the commencement of murder, Defendants’ daily activity committed with intent to kill the victim by burialing the victim, and following up to the time and place of the crime, there is a very close act with the “act of homicideing with the victim,” and at the same time and place, the Defendants’ commencement of the crime of murder can be deemed as having been committed.

Judgment

The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, namely, ① the place of the crime on which the Defendants Happed with the Gu, and the place of the crime indicated in the facts charged to which the Defendants Happed with the Gu, appears to have been selected because Defendant B was an area where Defendant B was well aware, and Defendant B, at the court of the court of this case, knew that “The reason why the victims moved to the Gun mountain where they attempted to

F is likely to go home again to F

Dor. Dor.