1. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment as to Defendant A’s grounds of appeal in light of the evidence duly admitted by the lower court, it is justifiable for the lower court to have found Defendant A guilty of all of the facts charged in the instant case against the Defendant, on the grounds indicated in its reasoning, of violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse, violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse, and assault against Defendant J.

In addition, pursuant to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment or imprisonment without prison labor for more than ten years has been imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed. Thus, in this case where a more minor sentence has been imposed against Defendant A, the argument that the punishment is too unreasonable is not a legitimate

2. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the evidence duly admitted by the lower court as to Defendant B’s grounds of appeal, the lower court is justifiable to have found Defendant B guilty of all the charges of this case on the grounds indicated in its reasoning. In so doing, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the reinforcement of confessions, the principle of court-oriented trial, and

3. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment on the grounds of appeal by the prosecutor in light of the record, the lower court, based on its reasoning, violates the Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes against Defendant A and Protection, etc. of Victims (a minor rape, etc. under thirteen years of age) among the instant charges against Defendant A.