All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A1) In fact, Defendant A did not use the pentum while threatening the victims at the time of the instant crime, but the lower court found Defendant A guilty of this part of the facts charged. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine.

2) The lower court’s sentencing against Defendant A, who was improper in sentencing, is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B did not have planned to commit the instant crime with Defendant A or shared the act of committing the instant crime, and even if Defendant B made it easier for Defendant A to commit the instant crime at the scene of the instant crime, Defendant B was merely an aiding and abetting crime. B) Defendant B voluntarily appeared at the police on the day of the instant crime, and voluntarily accepted Defendant B’s participation on the day of the instant crime.

C) Nevertheless, the court below sentenced Defendant B to two years and six months of imprisonment without applying Article 52(1) of the Criminal Act, taking Defendant B as a joint principal offender for the instant crime, without applying Article 52(1) of the Criminal Act. In so doing, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles.

2) The lower court’s sentencing on Defendant B is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Determination 1 on the Defendants’ assertion of mistake of facts, etc.

Defendant

A, while showing the pentle, will spawn down “Akyl spawn.”

The victim J also made a concrete statement to the effect that “the victim J on board the vehicle” made a threat “to see the vehicle due to the collapse of this weather year”. The victim J also made a statement to the effect that “The victim J on the vehicle.”