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 three years and six months.

Defendant

A, C,.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A1) As the defense counsel asserts that the cause for a mental disorder is mismisunderstanding or misunderstanding the legal doctrine, this is deemed as a mental disorder and the reason for appeal is determined, and it is not separately determined as to the assertion of mistake of facts.

misunderstanding of the legal principles, there were mental and physical loss or mental weakness at the time of committing the instant crime.

2) The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (two years and six months of imprisonment, confiscation, and additional collection of KRW 200,000) is too unreasonable.

B. Examining the judgment of the court below in the misapprehension of the legal principles, Defendant B (1) did not add a repeated offense under the applicable law to the Defendant, and the Defendant’s assertion that the above ground for sentencing was erroneous, and thus, the judgment of the court below was made without separately determining the misapprehension of legal principles.

Although the Defendant was not a crime during the period of repeated crime, the lower court sentenced the heavy punishment on the ground that the sentencing was a crime during the period of repeated crime.

2) The sentence of the lower court (four years of imprisonment) that is unfair in sentencing is too unreasonable.

(c)

Defendant

D1) At the time of committing the instant crime, mental and physical loss or mental weakness was in a state of mental and physical weakness.

2) The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

(d)

Defendant

C, E, and F (Cheating in Sentencing) The sentence of the lower court (hereinafter “Defendant C”): four years of imprisonment; one year and six months of imprisonment; and ten months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Determination on Defendant A’s assertion 1) In light of the Defendant’s role in the instant crime, degree of participation, and circumstances before and after the instant crime, the Defendant had no or weak ability to discern things or make decisions by using drugs at the time of the instant crime.

It is difficult to see it.

2) There are extenuating circumstances such as the Defendant’s recognition of and reflects on a criminal act, and the Defendant’s health status is not good at class 6 of the physical disability.

However, the defendant is in the same kind.