1. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment on the grounds of Defendant F and AL’s appeal in light of the evidence duly admitted by the lower court and the first instance court, it is justifiable for the lower court to have maintained the first instance judgment that convicted Defendant F and AL of the instant facts charged on the grounds stated in its reasoning.

In so doing, contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, there were no errors by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal principles on joint principal offenders and legal concurrence.

2. As to the grounds of Defendant R’s appeal, Defendant R’s ground of appeal is that the lower court’s measure was erroneous in rejecting the victim’s statement in the court and adopting only the statement in the investigative agency as evidence.

However, the above ground of appeal is without merit, which leads to the misunderstanding of evidence selection or fact-finding, which belongs to the exclusive jurisdiction of the court below, and is not a legitimate ground of appeal.

B. Even in light of the evidence duly admitted by the lower court and the first instance court, it is justifiable to maintain the first instance judgment convicting Defendant R in the instant charges on the grounds stated in its reasoning.

In so doing, contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, there were no errors by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on injury.

3. As to Defendant Q’s final appeal, Defendant Q did not submit a written reason for final appeal within the submission period for final appeal. Defendant Q did not state the grounds for final appeal in the final appeal.

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