The judgment below

Of them, the part against Defendant C shall be reversed.

Defendant

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

Defendant

A. A.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant A, B, and B explicitly withdrawn the claim of mental disability in the third trial at the appellate trial.

1) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles, Defendant A and B did not have conspired with Defendant C to commit robbery, and there is no means of taking the victim’s property by force. Defendant A and B did not have predicted the acceptance of documents by Defendant C. Defendant C had taken the above documents at the request of G, which is the victim’s seat, and Defendant C was not used as a means of taking property. Defendant A and B did not have the means of taking property. Defendant A did not have an anticipated direction to assault Defendant A and B to injure the victim. Defendant A did not have an unreasonable sentencing sentence. 2) The lower court’s respective sentences (four years of imprisonment) against Defendant A and B are too heavy.

B. On August 28, 2019, Defendant C’s state appointed defense counsel filed a statement of grounds for appeal stating “misunderstanding of facts” and “an unfair form of punishment,” with the appellate court on the grounds of appeal. However, the private defense counsel appointed by Defendant C on September 3, 2019 organized his/her opinion to the effect that all of the facts charged in the instant case was recognized on September 18, 2019, and Defendant C and the private defense counsel appealed on September 20, 2019 on the first day of this court’s trial on September 20, 2019, on the grounds of “non-psynife” and “an unfair form of punishment.” As such, Defendant C’s assertion of mistake of facts is deemed to have been withdrawn. The grounds for appeal regarding “an unfair form of punishment” is limited to the grounds for appeal that Defendant C’s submission on August 29 and August 30, 2019.

A. The Defendant C committed the instant crime in a state of mental and psychological anxiety, such as depression, apprehension, early distress, and old-age, after having been engaged in sexual traffic for a considerable period of time, by notifying the victim of the instant sexual traffic to his/her family members, such as her child, etc., and by threatening him/her to spread the bale image, etc., and thereby committing the instant crime. Therefore, at the time of committing the instant crime, Defendant C committed the instant crime with normal ability to discern things or make decisions.