All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

A. Defendant 1 did not have committed rape by misunderstanding of facts. Nevertheless, the lower court found Defendant guilty of all the facts charged in the instant case. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment. 2) The sentence (two years of imprisonment, etc.) sentenced by the lower court of unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.

B. The above sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination

A. 1) The lower court also asserted that the Defendant had the same purport as the grounds for appeal in this part, and the lower court determined that the Defendant attempted to rape as stated in the facts constituting a crime, comprehensively taking account of the circumstances in its reasoning that were duly admitted and investigated by the evidence. 2) The lower court’s conclusion is right and wrong if it is determined based on the legal doctrine on the criteria for determining the credibility of the statement of a person claiming sexual assault victims, the rules of evidence, and the evidence, and there is no error of law that affected the conclusion of the judgment

3) Therefore, the Defendant’s assertion of misunderstanding of facts is without merit. (B) The sentencing of the lower court (as stated in detail in the 5 and 6th sentence of the lower judgment) on the assertion of unfair sentencing by both parties is justifiable in light of the statutory penalty for the crime of violating the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (Rape), the applicable sentences, and other sentencing cases, etc., of which punishment among each of the instant offenses is heavier than that of the instant offenses, and the sentencing materials added in the trial are not heavier or less than that to be reversed even if they are added to the sentencing materials added in the trial (in light of the sentencing guidelines and other sentencing

Therefore, the Defendant and the prosecutor’s assertion of unreasonable sentencing is without merit.

3. As such, the appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit, and all of them are under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.