The part concerning Defendant A, I, and J among the judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance shall be reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for one year.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal asserts that the sentencing of each of the following judgments is too unreasonable:

- The first instance judgment: Defendant A (one year of imprisonment), Defendant B (one year of long-term imprisonment, and short-term eight months): the second instance judgment: Defendant A (one year of imprisonment), Defendant I (one year of imprisonment), and Defendant J (one year of imprisonment).

2. Determination:

A. Prior to the judgment on the assertion of unfair sentencing on Defendant A’s assertion of unfair sentencing, prior to the judgment on Defendant A’s ex officio, the part concerning Defendant A among the criminal facts of the judgment of the court of first instance, which was combined with the part concerning Defendant A in the judgment of the court of second instance, is in a concurrent criminal relationship under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and each of the criminal facts of the judgment of the court of second instance should be sentenced to one punishment pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. In this regard, the part concerning

B. B. Prior to the determination of the Defendant B’s assertion of unfair sentencing on Defendant B’s ex officio determination, this paper examined ex officio.

Defendant

B At the time of the declaration of the first instance judgment, it is apparent that he was a juvenile under Article 2 of the Juvenile Act at the time of the declaration of the first instance judgment, but at the time of the trial, it has reached the age of majority. As such, the part concerning Defendant B among the judgment of the first instance that sentenced the Defendant to an irregular sentence was no longer maintained.

In addition, Defendant B may recognize the fact that the part concerning Defendant B among the judgment of the court of the second instance on July 12, 2013 has become final and conclusive due to his failure to file an appeal after having been sentenced to a maximum of one year and two months of imprisonment with labor for a short term or one year of a short term of one by the judgment of the court of the court of the second instance. The above special larceny, etc. for which the judgment has become final and conclusive and each of the crimes of this case in relation to concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, taking into account the equity in the case where the judgment is concurrently rendered in accordance with Article 39

C. Defendant I and J.