beta
Text
The judgment below
Part concerning Defendant B and C shall be reversed.
Defendant
B Imprisonment of 10 months, and Defendant C shall be punished by imprisonment of 8 months.
Reasons
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable that each sentence imposed by the court below on the Defendants (for a long term of one year, a short term of one year, a short term of ten months, a long term of one year, a short term of ten months, and a short term of ten months, and a short term of eight months) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. It is recognized that Defendant A recognized that all of the crimes of this case committed by Defendant A was against the wrongness of Defendant A, and that the Defendant was a juvenile of 17 years of age, and that the victim S’s injury was not relatively heavy.
However, the defendant had been already subject to juvenile protective disposition seven times due to special larceny, violation of the Road Traffic Act (unlicensed driving), etc. for the last three years, and in particular, even though he was sentenced to a two-year probation on January 17, 2014 to a two-year probation period due to special larceny, etc., he committed each of the crimes of this case even before the lapse of about two months from the date the above judgment was sentenced, and the nature of the crimes of this case is not good in light of the methods and attitudes of each of the crimes of this case, and no agreement has been reached with the victims of larceny and bodily injury until the trial. In full view of all the sentencing factors indicated in the arguments of this case including the above defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, circumstances after the crime of this case, etc., it is not determined that the sentence imposed by the court below against the defendant A is unreasonable.
Therefore, Defendant A’s above assertion is without merit.
B. As to Defendant B, Defendant B had been subject to juvenile protective disposition eight times during the last four years due to special larceny, violation of the Road Traffic Act (unlicensed driving), etc., Defendant B had a record of having been subject to the suspension of indictment once for a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint conflict) and a violation of the Road Traffic Act (unlicensed driving). In light of the methods and attitudes of each of the crimes of this case, the nature of the crime is not good, and the victim of the larceny and the victim of the bodily injury are not victims.