1. Of the judgment of the court below, the part on the defendants and the second.

3. Each of the judgment below is reversed.

Defendant

A. Imprisonment.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A1) misunderstanding of facts (as to the special larceny in the judgment of the court below of the third th.), there is no intent of unlawful acquisition by the defendant against the defendant. 2) The punishment of each court below on the defendant in unfair sentencing (as to the defendant in the judgment of the court of the court of the court of the court of the court below, 4 years of imprisonment, 3 years and 6 months of the short term, 2 years of imprisonment, 1 year and 6 months of the short term, 3 months of the court below

B. 1. The sentence of the lower court (three years of imprisonment) against Defendant P (unfair punishment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. All of the defendants appealed against the judgment of the court below 1 ex officio as to the grounds for appeal by the defendant A, and this court decided to hold a joint hearing of each of the above appeals cases.

However, each of the judgments of the court below against the defendant is in a concurrent crime relationship under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and one sentence shall be sentenced within the scope of a limited term of punishment pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. Thus, each judgment of the court below against the defendant shall no longer be maintained.

In addition, the Defendant No. 1.

2. At the time of the judgment of the court below, the juvenile provided in Article 2 of the Juvenile Act, but the adult has reached the trial of the court of first instance, which sentenced the defendant to a non-scheduled sentence;

2. The judgment of the court below is no longer maintained in this respect.

However, the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts is still subject to the judgment of this court, and this is examined below.

2) No. 3. 3. The lower court held that: (a) the Defendant driven a vehicle without immediately returning it; (b) parked the vehicle at another place where the vehicle was used on the following day; (c) the key of the vehicle was seized at the televising method where the vehicle is located; (d) the Defendant sent a text message that the victim would bring the vehicle to his/her father; and (c) the Defendant did not return the vehicle even though the Defendant confirmed it.