1. As to the grounds for appeal by Defendant A, the lower court convicted Defendant A of the charges of rape, including the charges of violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (hereinafter “Sexual Crimes Punishment Act”) against Defendant A.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment 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 establishment of the crime of rape and the willful negligence.

2. On the grounds of Defendant B’s appeal, the lower court found Defendant B guilty of the attempted violation of the Punishment of Sexual Violence Act (Rape) which is the selective and primary facts charged against Defendant B.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and the record, the lower court did not err in its judgment 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 establishment of attempted sexual assault crimes (influence and rape).

3. On the grounds of the prosecutor’s appeal, the lower court acquitted Defendant A of charges on the charge of violation of the Punishment of Sexual Violence (Rape in Residence) and larceny on the ground that there was no proof of a crime.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and records, the lower court did not err in its judgment 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 intent of intrusion into residence and the intent of unlawful acquisition of larceny.

4. Therefore, all appeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.