[Scope of reversal] Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the case No. 2013 order 4322 of the case is set forth in the annexed list of crimes against Defendant C.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The judgment of the court below is unfair because each sentence imposed by the Defendants against the Defendants is too unreasonable.

(1) The first instance judgment: Defendant C (one year of imprisonment, four years and six months of imprisonment), Defendant E (three years of imprisonment), Defendant ID (two months of imprisonment): Defendant A (one year and eight months of imprisonment), Defendant B (two years of imprisonment), Defendant C (two years of imprisonment), Defendant D (one year and nine months of imprisonment, six months of imprisonment), Defendant E (one year and six months of imprisonment), Defendant F (one year and six months of imprisonment), Defendant G (ten months of imprisonment), and Defendant G (ten months of imprisonment): Defendant ID (one year and six months of imprisonment).

B. Each sentence sentenced by the Prosecutor 2 and 3 of the lower judgment against the Defendants is too unfasible and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. We first examine ex officio the judgment on the Defendants and the Prosecutor’s grounds for appeal as follows.

1) The part of the combined destruction (the defendant C, E, ID No. 1, 2, and the court of original judgment with respect to the defendant C, E, and ID, and the court of original judgment with respect to the defendant C, E, and ID as described in the first paragraph (a) after completing separate hearings with respect to the defendant ID respectively. The above defendants filed an appeal against each of the above judgments, and the court of original judgment decided to hold concurrent hearings with each of the above appeals. The above crimes committed after the final crime in the first instance judgment with respect to the defendant C are committed after the final crime in the first instance judgment, each of the crimes in the first and second instance judgment with respect to the defendant E, and the crimes in Articles 1 and 3 with respect to the defendant ID are in the concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and each of the crimes in the first and third instance judgment with respect to the defendant C, E should be punished by a single sentence with a single sentence within the period of punishment aggravated under Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. In this regard, the first judgment of the judgment below, the defendants No. C, 20132, each of the forged and 32.