The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant

A Imprisonment of three years and six months, and Defendant B shall be punished by imprisonment of one year and six months, respectively.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A: misunderstanding of facts, mental and physical disability, and misunderstanding of facts 1) : Recognizing the fact that Defendant A committed the crime of robbery by assaulting the victim and injuring the victim on the idea of forcibly taking money and goods from the victim. However, Defendant A’s forcibly taking money and goods from the victim only thought Defendant A mixed with the victim, and there was no conspiracy to commit the crime of robbery with Defendant B. In addition, Defendant A did not say Defendant B as having the victim’s bank and did not know of the fact with the victim’s bank, and Defendant B did not know of the fact with the victim’s bank. Thus, Defendant A’s robbery was nothing more than attempted because it was impossible for the victim to forcibly take the victim’s bank. 2) Defendant A was in a state of mental and physical disability by drinking only at the time of the instant crime.

3) The sentence imposed by the lower court of unfair sentencing (three years and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable. B. Defendant B was involved in the assault in the course of speaking the robbery injury crime committed by Defendant A alone, and the fact that Defendant A and the victim were inflicted an injury jointly with the Defendant. However, there was no conspiracy between Defendant A and robbery and there was no intent to commit robbery.

In addition, Defendant B did not intend to take the victim's bags, and it was due to Defendant B's rejection of the victim's bags by holding the victim's bags with Defendant A's bags. Thus, there is no fact that Defendant B forcibly took the victim's bags.

2) The sentence sentenced by the lower court on unreasonable sentencing (the imprisonment for three years and six months) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the defendants' assertion of mistake of facts

A. The summary of the facts charged reveals that the victim F(24 years of age) was able to see the fact that the victim F, while Defendant A had a fluencing son's money from his fluencing and a flucing fluencing a mobile phone image while Defendant A had a fluencing son's money during his fluencing period, the victim was aware of the victim'