The aim of the study was to identify different positions regarding the way in which 423 teenagers of secondary schools, including 215 young pupils (Mage = 12.5, SD = 1.5) and 208 older pupils (Mage = 16.5, SD = 1.5), integrated four informational cues (the level of antisocial behaviour, the consequences for the classroom, the apologies and the teacher's attitude) for judging the degree of gravity of an antisocial act during a tournament organized during a sports lesson. Thus, this mapping was then explored in punishment and justice judgements. The participants gave their judgments on gravity, punishment, and justice in 32 scenarios constructed from the combination of the information cues. Cluster analyses (hierarchical and K-means), ANOVAs, and chi-square tests have been done. Three different positions were observed. In each cluster, the information cues were combined in the same manner. The judgments on punishment are less severe than those on gravity and the judgments on justice less spreaded. The first cluster was called "Often Serious", "Often Punished" and "Often Fair". The second cluster was termed "Sometimes Serious", "Sometimes Punished" and "Sometimes Fair". The third cluster was termed "Often Serious concerning aggression vs. Seldom Serious concerning lateness and cheating", "Often Punished concerning aggression vs. Seldom Punished concerning lateness and cheating" and "Often Fair concerning aggression vs. Seldom Fair concerning lateness and cheating". The first cluster was made up of younger pupils (62,9%), the second cluster was made up of the same proportion of younger and older teenagers and the third cluster was made up of older pupils (62,2%). In cluster 1, the judgment on gravity was positively correlated with those on punishment and justice. In cluster 2, the judgment on punishment was positively correlated with the judgment on justice and this correlation was higher in cluster 3. These results complete the previous studies on moral judgment.