All of the first and second original judgments shall be reversed.

Defendant

A Imprisonment with prison labor for a maximum of four years, three years and six months.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendants: The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendants (the first instance court: the imprisonment of Defendant A; the imprisonment of a maximum of four years; the imprisonment of a maximum of three years and six months; the imprisonment of a maximum of three years and six months; the imprisonment of a maximum of three years and six months; the short of three years and three years; the second instance court: the imprisonment of a maximum of two months; the short of one month) is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor: The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendants is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Ex officio determination

A. Of the first judgment, the part against Defendant A and the second judgment of the first instance, the part against Defendant A and the second judgment of the second instance were appealed respectively by the Defendant and the Prosecutor, and the said court decided to jointly examine the above appeal cases.

Defendant

Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act applies to the crimes of violation of the Road Traffic Act (unlicensed Driving) among each of the crimes listed in the first judgment of the court of first instance against A, and the crimes listed in the second judgment of the court of second judgment except for the crimes of violation of the Road Traffic Act (unlicensed Driving) is concurrent crimes listed in the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, so long as both parties choose imprisonment, one sentence shall be sentenced within the scope of the term of punishment limited by concurrent crimes

B. Of the judgment of the first instance, the part on DefendantO against DefendantO in the judgment of the first instance was “juvenile” under Article 2 of the Juvenile Act at the time when the judgment of the first instance was rendered, but when the judgment of the first instance was rendered at the time of sentence, the part on DefendantO in the judgment of the first instance, which sentenced DefendantO to mitigation of juvenile offenses on the ground that DefendantO was a juvenile under the Juvenile Act, cannot be maintained.

3. In conclusion, the first and second judgment of the court below have grounds for reversal of authority as seen earlier. Thus, without examining the Defendants and the prosecutor’s assertion of unfair sentencing, all of them are reversed under Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is again decided as follows.

【Reason for the Judgment of the Supreme Court】 Summary of the facts constituting a crime and evidence