Defendant A, B, D, E, F, and G in the judgment of the court of first instance, and the judgment of the court of second instance shall be reversed.

Defendant .

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., a short-term of 10 years of imprisonment; Defendant B; Defendant C; Defendant C: a long-term of 10 years of imprisonment; a long-term of 5 years of imprisonment; Defendant D; a long-term of 7 years of imprisonment; a long-term of 6 years of imprisonment; a long-term of 4 years of short-term of 6 years of imprisonment; Defendant F; a long-term of 1 year and 6 months of short-term of 2 years of imprisonment; Defendant G: two years of imprisonment; a long-term of 3 years of short-term imprisonment; Defendant H; and a long-term of 6 months of long-term of 8 months) and a second sentence of the lower court (Defendant A) are excessively unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal of ex officio (defendant A), the court of original judgment, No. 1, and No. 2, should be sentenced to a single sentence within the scope of the term of punishment for concurrent crimes under Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act, on the grounds that the court of original judgment rendered separate hearings with respect to Defendant A as the High Government District Court Decision No. 2012 Gohap145 and 2010 Godan1097, respectively, and sentenced the former to 10 years of imprisonment for a short term of 5 years, and the latter to 8 months of imprisonment for a long term of 10 years. The above defendant filed an appeal against each of the above decisions, and this court decided to jointly deliberate on the above two appeals. The above crimes of the court of original judgment are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act and must be sentenced to a single sentence within the scope of the term of punishment for concurrent crimes under Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. In this regard, the part of the judgment of the court of the first judgment and the court below as to the above Defendant

B. The crime of this case on the assertion of unfair sentencing by Defendant B, D, E, F, and G is committed with co-defendant A, C, and H in collaboration on three occasions, resulting in the victim's bodily injury, such as scambing-out transfusion, etc., and resulting in the victim's death due to prompt shock and damage to the two parts, and the body was stored in the nearby neighborhood park forest zone near the residence of Defendant C and concealed the body.