1. The part of the judgment of the court below regarding Defendant B shall be reversed.

Defendant

B A person shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

except that this shall not apply.

1. Improper sentencing for each of the reasons for appeal;

2. The appellate court’s judgment is reasonable to respect the first-class sentencing judgment in a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first-class judgment, and the first-class sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion.

A. The lower court rendered a sentence within the sentencing criteria, taking into account the circumstances favorable to the fact that Defendant A had dependents, such as the serious reflective necessity, recidivism during the period of suspension of execution, and criminal records of the same kind, etc., and that there was a woman of matrimonial engagement, etc.

Unlike the investigation agency and the court below, it is recognized that the defendant recognized the crime for the first time and against it, that women of matrimonial engagement immediately are in front of childbirth, and that the construction company in operation of the defendant is also in front of the completion of the building (the legal statement of the witness AA and the submission of reference materials for the defendant's trial).

However, considering these circumstances, the sentencing conditions prior to the trial were significantly changed.

It is difficult to see it.

In preparation for the commission of crime, the Defendant planned and carried out the crime that was led by the first head of the business in the name of B, and had been sentenced to the suspension of the execution of imprisonment by operating the illegal game room even before the occurrence of the crime. Besides, there are multiple criminal records of the suspension of execution due to different kinds of crimes, and the sentencing of the lower court cannot be deemed unfair because the sentence of the lower court is too excessive, in full view of the fact that the sentencing of the lower court is concerned.

Therefore, Defendant A’s assertion is without merit.

B. The lower court rendered a sentence on Defendant B’s appeal in consideration of the following circumstances: (a) providing the name; (b) having committed a second offense during the period of the same kind of suspension of execution; and (c) having favorable circumstances to the confession.

Although the defendant conspired with A to commit a crime in the name of the investigative agency is not good, it is only the fact that the defendant recognized the crime in the process of the original trial at the latest, and only the name was provided, and the illegal game room is operated.