Of the judgment of the court below of first instance, the part on Defendant B and C and the judgment of the court below 2 and 3 shall be reversed.

Defendant

B Imprisonment with prison labor of one year and eight months.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Of the judgment of the court below 1, Defendant A (unfair sentencing) the sentence against the Defendant (one year and four months of imprisonment, and confiscation) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B (misunderstanding of facts, and improper sentencing) (1) Of the lower judgment, the Defendant did not participate in the crime described in Articles 1 and 2 of the List of Offenses No. 1745, which was 2017 higher group of the lower judgment.

(2) The punishment of the Defendant (one year and two months of imprisonment) and the punishment of the Defendant (one year of imprisonment) in the judgment of the second instance against the judgment of the court below is too unreasonable.

(c)

Defendant

C. The punishment of the accused (6 months of imprisonment) and the punishment of the accused (2 months of imprisonment and confiscation) in the judgment of the third court is too unreasonable.

(d)

It is unfair that the 3rd judgment decision of the prosecutor (unfair sentencing) imposed on Defendant C is too uneasible.

2. There is no change in circumstances that may be considered in sentencing after the judgment of the first instance court for Defendant A was rendered, and considering the various sentencing conditions shown in the records and arguments of this case, the first deliberation sentence against the Defendant is too unreasonable even considering the circumstances alleged by the Defendant on the grounds of appeal.

3. Determination as to Defendant B and C

A. This court decided to hold a joint hearing of all appeals cases against each judgment of the first instance court. Each of the above defendants' crimes against each judgment of the first instance court is in a concurrent relationship with each other under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and a sentence should be imposed within the scope of the term of punishment aggravated for concurrent crimes in accordance with Article 38 (1) of the Criminal Act. In this regard, the part on the defendant B and C in each judgment of the first instance court cannot be maintained any longer.

B. Nevertheless, the Defendant B’s assertion of mistake as to Defendant B’s fact-finding is still subject to the judgment of this court, and thus, this is examined.

Defendant

B made the same argument in the first instance court, and the first instance court's judgment states detailed reasons.