The judgment below

Of the compensation, the part excluding the compensation order for the applicant E shall be reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a year.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) of the lower court’s punishment (one year and four months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Each of the crimes of this case with respect to the determination of the unfair argument of sentencing is highly serious in light of the method and frequency thereof.

The Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence for the same crime, and was sentenced to a criminal punishment for the same crime, and was sentenced to a suspended sentence for the same crime, without being aware of the fact that the suspended sentence was revoked, and committed each of the crimes of this case under several different laws during the same repeated crime period. Therefore, it is inevitable to sentence the Defendant to a criminal sentence.

However, all of the crimes of this case were led to the confession of each of the crimes of this case, and they were divided into the truth.

The amount of damage is relatively minor, and the defendant is in the first instance, and all the victims except the victims E pay the full amount of damage, and some victims do not want the punishment of the defendant.

The equity with the sentence sentenced in the same or similar case shall also be considered.

In full view of the aforementioned circumstances, the Defendant’s age, sex and environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment seems to be too unreasonable and unfair. Thus, the Defendant’s above assertion is reasonable.

3. The Defendant agreed to pay the amount of damage to the applicant C, D, and F as a result of the judgment on the compensation order portion for the applicant C, D, and F. Since the scope of the Defendant’s compensation liability is unclear and thus it is impossible to issue a compensation order, the part of the judgment below regarding the compensation order for the applicant C, D, and F cannot be maintained.

4. The defendant's appeal is reasonable, and the part of the compensation order for the petitioner C, D, and F is reversed ex officio as above. Thus, pursuant to Article 364 (2) and Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the part of the judgment below excluding the compensation order for the petitioner E among the compensation applicants.