All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the defendants A: imprisonment of 5 years; imprisonment of 2 years and 6 months) of the court below is too unreasonable;

2. Determination

A. The Defendant partially divided Defendant A’s mistake in depth, and the Defendant re-entered the victim’s difficult economic situation at the scene of the crime by reporting the victim’s property, which he took advantage of his strong economic situation, and the right to know part of the hearing tape, the property damage caused by the instant crime is minor, and it is recognized that he agreed with the victim.

However, the crime of this case is committed with B, which is a female victim who returned late at night in collaboration with B, purchased tools to use for the crime, and found in the new wall the victim's house. The defendant threatens the victim with a deadly weapon, and B forcibly takes the victim's property by taking the victim's hand with hearing tape prepared in advance, and it is very poor in light of the circumstances of the crime, method of the crime, contents, etc., and although the victim agreed with the defendants, although it seems that he would have received considerable mental shock, the defendant again commits the special robbery of this case, which is a specific violent crime, within the period of repeated crime after the execution of imprisonment was completed. The statutory punishment of the special robbery of this case is a life imprisonment or imprisonment for a limited term of five years, but the court below selected a limited term of imprisonment, and the maximum amount of imprisonment with prison labor under the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment of Specific violent Crimes, and the defendant's motive and condition of the crime are not recognized as unfair, and the defendant's motive and condition of the crime of this case are not acknowledged.

B. Defendant B is the Defendant.