The judgment below

The part of the defendant's case against the defendant B (excluding the part of the compensation order) shall be reversed.

Defendant

B.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant B (1) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles (the part concerning robbery) (1) with respect to the part concerning the taking of personal phones, Defendant’s assault and intimidation did not reach the degree of suppressing the victim J’s resistance, thereby taking the cell phone by force.

subsection (b) of this section.

② In relation to the part of the violation of the law by force against the defendant, the defendant was satisfing from the above victim for the purpose of preventing the escape of the victim J, and at the time, the defendant was satisfing from the above victim, and there was no intention of illegal acquisition as to the violation of the law by force

subsection (b) of this section.

2) At the time of committing this part of the crime, the Defendant had weak ability to discern things or make decisions due to mental disorder, such as stimulative disorder, etc.

The punishment of the court below (three years and six months) is too heavy.

B. Illegal sentencing of Defendant A: The lower court’s punishment (two years and six months of imprisonment) is too heavy.

2. The judgment ex officio (as to Defendant B), prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal, the prosecutor, at the court below, applied the name of the crime in relation to the robbery part against Defendant B from “Robbery, bodily injury, and embezzlement,” and Article 337 of the Criminal Act “Article 350(1), Articles 257(1), and 355(1) of the Criminal Act” as “Article 350(1), 257(1), and Article 355(1) of the Criminal Act,” and applied for changes in the indictment as indicated in the facts charged below, and this court permitted this.

As a result, the part of the judgment of the court below on robbery against Defendant B was changed to the subject of the judgment, and thus it can no longer be maintained.

Therefore, the court below held that the above part and the remaining guilty part as to Defendant B are concurrent crimes under Article 37 of the Criminal Act.

On the other hand, one punishment was imposed for all.

Therefore, the part of the defendant case against the defendant B (excluding the part of the compensation order), which is related to the part of the court below's compensation order.