All appeals by the Defendants and the Prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A (misunderstanding of facts and improper sentencing) 1) The crime listed in Articles 3 through 7 of the List of Criminal Crimes as stated in the judgment below is only the crime committed independently by Defendant A without notifying Defendant B of the crime. It does not constitute a conspiracy with Defendant B.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that recognized the defendants as a joint principal offender is erroneous in fact.

2) The punishment sentenced by the lower court (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B (unfair sentencing) explicitly withdrawn Defendant B’s assertion of mistake of facts on the first trial date.

The punishment sentenced by the court below (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

(c)

According to the prosecutor’s misunderstanding of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles (only Defendant A), Defendant B’s statement, etc., the fact that Defendant A was involved from the beginning in the crime listed in No. 1 of the crime list in the lower judgment.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that found Defendant A not guilty on this part of the facts charged is erroneous by misapprehending the facts and by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2) The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendants is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the Defendant A’s assertion of mistake of facts (the part concerning the crime as stated in Nos. 3 through 7 of the crime list as indicated in the judgment below), the relevant legal doctrine provides that the intent of joint processing, which is a subjective element for the establishment of a joint principal offender under Article 30 of the Criminal Act, shall be one of the joint intent to commit a specific criminal act, and shall be transferred to the execution of one’s own intent by using another’s act.

Although the intention of joint processing is not sufficient to recognize the crime of others but to accept it without preventing it, there is no need to do so in advance, and each accomplice is not required to do so.