All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) Defendant 1 did not instruct the co-defendant B to commit each of the crimes stated in the facts charged of this case, and did not fully recognize the victims of the instant crime.

However, the defendant committed each of the above crimes in collusion with B.

In light of the above facts charged, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2) The sentence of the lower court (six months of imprisonment) which is unfair in sentencing is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts

A. In relation to co-offenders who jointly process two or more crimes, the conspiracy does not require any legal punishment, but is only a combination of two or more persons to jointly process crimes and realize crimes. If a combination of intent is formed in order or impliedly, a conspiracy is established. A person who does not directly participate in the act of implementation is held liable as a joint principal offender for the other co-offenders’ acts (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2013Do5080, Aug. 23, 2013). (b) Examining the following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court in light of the aforementioned legal principles, the Defendant directly involved in the acts listed in each of the facts charged in the instant case, or intended to realize the above acts, and the relationship of conspiracy was established by a combination of intent at least through a mutual agreement.

It is reasonable to view it.

Therefore, it can be recognized that the defendant committed the crime described in each of the above facts charged in collusion with B explicitly or implicitly.

1. B has some inconsistent parts in its statement, but the defendant committed an offense by having committed the crime.

(2).