The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant

A Imprisonment for one year, and each of the defendants B shall be punished by imprisonment for eight months.

1. Summary of the Defendants’ grounds for appeal: Unfair sentencing

2. On the grounds of appeal, in full view of the following factors: (a) the Defendants were led to confession and reflect on all of the instant crimes; (b) the agreement with the victim D was reached; (c) the thief against the victim F did not have any substantial damage; and (c) the damage to the victim I was recovered from considerable part; and (d) the Defendant’s respective criminal records, age, occupation, and other factors of sentencing specified in the records and arguments of this case, the sentence of the lower judgment, which sentenced the Defendant A to imprisonment with labor for up to one year and four months, is somewhat unreasonable.

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.

[Dao-written judgment] The criminal facts and the summary of the evidence recognized by the court below are all the same as the entries in the corresponding column of the judgment below, and thus, they are cited as it is in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning criminal facts and the choice of punishment A: Article 331(2) and (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of special larceny), Articles 342, 331(2) and (1) (the point of attempted special larceny) of the Criminal Act, Article 81 Subparag. 2 and 12(1) of the Automobile Management Act (the point of failing to file an application for registration of transfer of ownership of a motor vehicle, choice of imprisonment), Article 329 of the Criminal Act (the point of choice of imprisonment), Defendant B: Article 331(2) and (1) of the Criminal Act, Articles 342 and 331(2) and (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of attempted special larceny)

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendant B’s discretionary mitigation: Article 53 and Article 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2001Do1448, Apr. 1, 201) of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Da