The judgment below

Of them, the part on Defendant B shall be reversed.

Defendant

B A person shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

except that this judgment.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment with prison labor for one year; two years of probation; probation; community service order for 80 hours; Defendant B; and Defendant B: imprisonment with prison labor for eight months) of the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the judgment of the first instance court on the grounds of appeal by Defendant A, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). Based on the foregoing legal doctrine, there is no change in the sentencing conditions compared with the lower court’s failure to submit new sentencing data at the trial and the lower court. In full view of the factors revealed in the argument in the instant case, the lower court’s sentencing is too excessive and so it does not seem that the lower court exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

B. The judgment on the grounds for appeal by Defendant B has the record of being punished for the same kind of crime, and the attempts and rulings to be judged for the same kind of crime and different types of crime are highly likely to be criticized for each of the crimes in this case immediately after the pronouncement of the judgment.

However, when the defendant was in a trial, all of the crimes of this case are recognized.

In the lower court, the thief victims agreed with the victim of defamation and agreed to the victim K in the trial.

In addition, considering the various circumstances that form the conditions for sentencing as shown in the records and pleadings of this case, the sentence imposed by the court below is somewhat heavy.

3. As the appeal by Defendant B is well-grounded, pursuant to Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the part concerning Defendant B among the judgment below is reversed, and the appeal by Defendant A is again decided as follows. Since the appeal by Defendant A is without merit, it is dismissed pursuant to Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.

[Judgment as to Defendant B] A’s summary of facts constituting an offense and evidence.