The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant

A Imprisonment with prison labor for three years and for two years, respectively.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

The punishment sentenced by the court below to the defendants (four years of imprisonment with prison labor for the defendants A, three years of imprisonment with prison labor for the defendants) is too unreasonable.

Judgment

The crime of this case is committed by the Defendants, which is a criminal organization, by joining the "Gangnam Crime Prevention," and jointly with DL, BW, resulting in an abruption to the victim DO and murdering the victim D Q. In particular, the crime of murder is serious as an anti-social act between the victims' heavy and decent life, and the case is serious; it did not reach an agreement with the bereaved family members of the victim D Q or take measures to recover damage; and it did not agree with the victim DO. In light of the fact that the crime of this case was committed, the liability for the crime is not easy.

On the other hand, the Defendants recognized all the crimes of this case and reflects on the fact that the Defendants were involved in the crime of joint injury and murder by the order of the vessel crew of the crime group. Defendant B was inevitably involved in the crime of joint injury and murder by the order of the vessel crew of the crime group. Defendant A was not a leading assault against the victim DNA Q, and the degree of participation in the crime of joint injury and murder is relatively minor. The crime of this case is in a relatively minor relationship between the judgment of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a violation of the Act on the Punishment of Violence, etc. (a deadly Weapons, etc.) and the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act. The Defendants withdrawn from the "Gangnam-gu Twit-gu Telecommunication", the sentence imposed on the Defendants, the age and family relationship of the Defendants, criminal records, personality and conduct, environment, means and method of the crime, etc., and the circumstances after the crime are considered to be unfair. Thus, the above Defendants’ assertion is justified.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, as the defendants' appeal is well-grounded, and the following decision is rendered after pleading.

Criminal facts

(b).