Part concerning Defendant B in the judgment of the first instance court shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years and six months.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. As to the injury caused by robbery and special obstruction of performance of official duties among the facts charged in the instant case, even though the Defendant was suffering from external stress disorder due to the depression disorder, which is the representative symptoms at the time, and was lacking in the ability to discern things or make decisions due to the shock disorder, which is the representative symptoms at the time, the judgment of the first instance court is excessive, and there is an error of law that affected the conclusion of the judgment due to the misapprehension of the legal principles

B. The first sentence of an unreasonable sentencing (three years and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant ex officio, as to the injury by robbery among the facts charged in the instant case, the prosecutor examined ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant, and as to the injury by robbery among the facts charged in the instant case, the name of the crime "injury by robbery" is "a special larceny attempted, violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a collective, deadly weapons, etc.)," and the applicable provisions of law are "Article 337 of the Criminal Act" in "Articles 342 and 331 (1) of the Criminal Act, Articles 3 (1) and 2 (1) 3 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, and Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act" in "Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act," and the facts charged under the existing facts charged [the grounds for the judgment to be rendered] [the reasons for the judgment to be applied for permission of modification of indictment as stated in paragraphs (1) and (2) of this case's violation of the Punishment of Violence, etc.

There are such reasons for ex officio reversal in the judgment of the first instance.

Even if the defendant's claim of mental disability is still subject to the judgment of this court, it is examined.

3. According to the record of the judgment on the Defendant’s claim of mental retardation, the circumstance where the Defendant was diagnosed as having been affected by the 2005 brain disease, etc.