The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendants shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years and six months.

However, from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive, each.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A1) Since the injury suffered by a victim of misapprehension of the legal doctrine was not an opportunity for the victim to take advantage of goods against the victim, the injury regardless of such opportunity, Defendant A cannot be punished as an injury by robbery. 2) Defendant A conspired to take advantage of facts against the victim or participated in the coercion of goods against the victim.

In addition, violence at the time of taking the goods into force did not reach the necessary level for the establishment of robbery.

Therefore, the court below erred by misapprehending the fact that the court below recognized Defendant A as a criminal liability for the part concerning the taking of goods.

3) Since Defendant A suffered severe depression, such as bullyinging bullying when attending a high school and think of suicide, etc., and Defendant A has to exercise violence against the victim due to the memory of the above collective bullying, Defendant A shall be subject to mitigation of mental and physical disability with respect to Defendant A. 4) The punishment sentenced by the lower court of unfair sentencing to Defendant A (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B (A) misunderstanding of facts) Inasmuch as Defendant B conspiredd to or participated in the taking of goods against the victim, it is erroneous for Defendant B to have found Defendant B liable for the charge of taking the part of taking the goods in addition to the taking of the injury against the victim.

B) Even if Defendant B is deemed liable for an injury by robbery, Defendant B’s act was passive in assault by the victim, and other acts did not properly know that the victim’s goods were brought about, and thus, constitutes an aiding and abetting offender, not a joint principal offender. 2) Punishment (one year and six months of imprisonment) sentenced by the lower court of unreasonable sentencing to Defendant B is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the Defendants’ assertion of misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, the summary of the charge concerning the injury by robbery and the summary of the part concerning the injury by robbery among the facts charged in this case’s judgment of the court below is to assault the victim D (the Defendants are 22 years of age) together with E, F, G, H, etc.