The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant

A and C shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for two years and six months, and by imprisonment for three years and six months, respectively.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The punishment sentenced by the lower court against Defendant A (a punishment of four years of imprisonment, and orders to complete sexual assault treatment programs for 80 hours) is too unreasonable.

B. At the time of the sexual intercourse between the Defendant, A, and the victim, the victim was not in a state of mental or physical loss or resistance, and the Defendant was aware of the mental or physical loss or resistance of the victim, and did not have the intent to have sexual intercourse with the victim by using it. There was no conspiracy between the Defendant, A, and C.

B) On the other hand, C’s attempted to engage in sexual intercourse with the victim, the act occurred one to two hours after the sexual intercourse between the Defendant, A, and the victim. At the time, the Defendant was locked, and the Defendant did not appear in the house, and thus, C cannot be held liable to commit the above act.

In addition, in light of the fact that one victim is relatively detailed at the time, and the victim is faced with the cell phone, and the victim is found to find the cell phone and is leaving the telecom, the victim was not in a state of mental or physical loss or resistance. There was no intention to have sexual intercourse with the defendant in recognition of the victim's mental or physical loss or resistance impossibility, and there was no conspiracy between the defendant, A, and C.

2) The punishment sentenced by the lower court against the Defendant (a punishment of four years of imprisonment, and orders to complete sexual assault treatment programs for 80 hours) is too unreasonable.

(c)

Defendant

C The punishment sentenced by the court below against the defendant (the imprisonment of three years and the order to complete sexual assault treatment programs for 80 hours) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to Defendant B’s assertion of mistake of facts, first, we examine the part on which Defendant and A have sexual intercourse with the victim in sequence.

A) In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court and the evidence duly admitted and examined by the first instance court, A and the Defendant are in sequence the victims.