Of those, the guilty part against Defendant A and B shall be reversed.

Defendant

A Imprisonment of one year and six months, and Defendant B.

A. It is true that Defendants (1) asserted the misapprehension of the legal principles of Defendants A and B (A) inflicted bodily injury and assault on the victim AB and AD as stated in the facts of the crime in the judgment below.

However, the Defendants cannot be said to have a habit of violence.

Nevertheless, the court below found the Defendants guilty of habitual injury.

Therefore, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on habituality.

(B) The Defendants’ violation of the Act on the Punishment of Arrangement of Commercial Sex Acts, Etc. (the Act on the Punishment of Commercial Sex Acts, Etc.) is related to the crime of a final judgment and the crime of a comprehensive offense, and the judgment of acquittal shall be rendered, as it was conducted before

Nevertheless, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to acquittal.

(2) Defendant C did not have concealed CCTV monitors and three saws.

(3) Each sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendants (i) and (ii) 2 years and 6 months of imprisonment, (ii) 2 years of imprisonment, and (iii) Defendant C: 10 months of imprisonment) are excessively unreasonable.

B. (1) According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, the court below erred by misunderstanding the facts although all of the facts charged can be admitted.

(2) The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendants is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Judgment on misconception of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

A. As to the assertion that Defendant A and B did not have a habit of violence, the Defendants asserted to the same effect as the lower court.

The lower court did not accept the Defendants’ assertion on the grounds stated in its reasoning.

The reasoning of the judgment below is examined closely with the records, and such judgment of the court below is examined.