All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. According to the records of the judgment on Defendant A’s appeal, with respect to the judgment of the court below rendered on January 22, 2020, the defendant submitted a written waiver of the right to appeal to the court of original judgment on January 28, 2020 and submitted the written waiver of the right to appeal to the court of original judgment on January 28, 2020, which is the following day, to the court of original judgment.

Thus, the defendant, by submitting a written waiver of right to appeal on January 28, 2020, renounced the appeal against the judgment of the court below of this case. Since the defendant's right to appeal has ceased to exist on the same day, it is unlawful even if the defendant submitted a petition of appeal on January 29, 2020, before the period for filing an appeal expires.

Even if the defendant waives his appeal because he did not think that he will be judged concurrently with the case in which he is additionally prosecuted, such circumstance alone does not seem to have any grounds for invalidation or non-existence of the defendant's waiver of appeal.

Therefore, Defendant A’s appeal shall be dismissed by decision in accordance with Articles 362(1) and 360 of the Criminal Procedure Act. However, as long as Defendant B’s appeal is rendered, Defendant A’s appeal shall be dismissed by decision as above.

2. Judgment on Defendant B’s appeal

A. The summary of the grounds for appeal is unreasonable because the punishment imposed by the court below on Defendant B (two years of imprisonment, etc.) is too unreasonable.

B. It is reasonable to respect the sentencing conditions compared to the judgment of the first instance court where there is no change in the sentencing conditions, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). Based on the foregoing legal doctrine, the lower court, based on the foregoing, found the Defendant still young and has no social experience, and the victims are unable to recover from damage due to the absence of economic difficulties or surrounding support, but appears to be seriously against the detention, and the Defendant gains revenues from a normal society.