The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment for four years, and imprisonment for three years and six months, respectively.

Summary of Reasons for appeal

A. Defendants 1) misunderstanding of facts (Defendant B) did not have conspired and participated in the crime of robbery of this case.

Nevertheless, the court below found the defendant guilty of robbery by misunderstanding the facts, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2) Although the Defendant, at the time of committing the instant crime, was unable to discern things or make a decision due to his primary activity, the lower court erred by exceeding this and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

3) The sentence of the lower court (defendant A: 3 years of imprisonment; 5 years of suspended sentence; 2 years of suspended sentence; 4 years of suspended sentence) is too unreasonable.

B. Although misunderstanding the legal principles of prosecutor (constition of all the Defendants), the injury inflicted by the victim due to the crime of robbery in this case constitutes the injury of robbery, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal principles, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment, on the grounds that it cannot be deemed that the injury inflicted on the victim constitutes the injury of robbery.

2) The lower court’s improper sentencing is too uneasible and unreasonable.

Judgment

A. As to Defendant B’s assertion of mistake of facts, the Defendant asserted to the same effect as the lower court.

The court below fully acknowledged that Defendant A had the intent to commit robbery at the time of assaulting and threatening the victim, namely, the circumstances acknowledged by the evidence cited by the court below. Defendant B actively participated in the crime, such as holding the victim’s disease against Defendant A and taking money from the victim who does not have any criminal intent, while Defendant B actively took part in the crime. ② The victim stated that Defendant B would pay the money after Defendant A went to the court of the court of the court below as “I would like to pay the money.”

(3) The statement stated in the opinion that “the money was given.”