The part concerning Defendant D, B, and C in the judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance shall be reversed.

Defendant

D. Long-term imprisonment.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. It is unfair that the sentence of the first instance court against Defendant D (the judgment of the first instance court) against Defendant D (the imprisonment of a maximum of three years, a short of two years and six months) is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the second instance judgment against the Defendants (Defendant A: 8 months of imprisonment; Defendant B: imprisonment with prison labor for a maximum of one year and six months; imprisonment for a short of one year and six months; imprisonment with prison labor for a short of one year; imprisonment with prison labor for a short of three years; imprisonment with prison labor for a maximum of ten months; imprisonment with prison labor for a short of six months; three years of suspended execution for a short of six months; Defendant D: imprisonment with prison labor for a maximum of ten months; and three years of suspended execution for a short of six months).

2. Ex officio determination

A. The judgment of the court below against Defendant D was rendered and the judgment of the court of first instance was rendered, and the prosecutor filed an appeal against Defendant D with respect to the judgment of the court of second instance, and the court of second instance decided to hold concurrent hearings of each of the above appeal cases. The judgment of the court below against Defendant D is a single sentence under Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act in relation to each of the concurrent offenses under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act. In addition, as seen below, the court of second instance is unable to determine the maximum and short term and determine the term of imprisonment when the court of second instance sentenced Defendant D to the suspension of the execution of imprisonment with respect to Defendant D, and thus, the judgment of the court below against Defendant D cannot be maintained.

B. Defendant B and Article 60 of the Juvenile Act provides that “If a juvenile commits a crime punishable by imprisonment for a maximum term of not less than two years as statutory penalty, a sentence shall be imposed within the scope of the sentence, but this provision shall not apply when a suspended sentence is imposed.” Article 62 of the Juvenile Act provides that “A juvenile under 18 years of age shall not be sentenced to confinement pursuant to Article 70 of the Criminal Act,” while the court below sentenced Defendant B and C to a suspended sentence of imprisonment for a limited term of not less than two years, the term and the short term of imprisonment shall be imposed.”