The judgment of the court below is reversed.

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

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles or misconception of facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment by recognizing only the crime of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint injury) and the crime of larceny, even though the crime of robbery was established, since the defendant committed violence against the victim and committed violence against the victim, and caused the victim to have failed to resist immediately, thereby causing the crime to be committed.

B. The sentence of unfair sentencing (one year and six months of imprisonment, three years of suspended execution, probation, and 120 hours of community service order) of the lower court is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. 1) The summary of the facts charged in this case is as follows: (a) the Defendant is trying to take the victim’s money and valuables from assault as stated in paragraph (1) of the facts charged in the judgment of the court below in a timely manner by considering that the victim was unable to resist; and (b) in the back of the victim’s money, one locket specified in paragraph (2) of the facts charged in the judgment of the court below was taken by force on the victim’s property; and (c) the robbery’s injury to the victim in an opportunity for robbery if the result of robbery was caused by assault or intimidation in the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 87Do2492, Feb. 9, 198), and the crime of robbery is established when the victim forcibly takes another’s property by assault or intimidation (Article 33 of the Criminal Act); and (d) the degree of assault and intimidation in the crime of robbery should be punished to the extent that the other party’s act of assault or intimidation, etc. (see, 300.).