The judgment below

The guilty portion against the Defendants is reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for not less than eight months and by imprisonment for Defendant B.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The prosecutor’s (i.e., mistake of facts) includes the case where the defendant was unable to escape from a certain place by means of an intangible means or made it considerably difficult to escape. According to the evidence, the court below found the defendant not guilty of this part of the facts charged, even if the defendant was found to have been detained by using the victim’s fear, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

Shebly sentenced by the lower court to the Defendants (Defendant A: 6 months of imprisonment, 1 year of suspended execution, and 1 year and 4 months of imprisonment) are deemed to be too uneasible and unfair.

B. The punishment sentenced by the court below against Defendant B is too unreasonable.

2. Determination as to the prosecutor's assertion of mistake of facts

A. The summary of this part of the facts charged is as follows: from January 25, 2016, the Defendants from around the same year.

2. By September 09:10, the Defendants detained the victim in collaboration with E, F, G, H, and I by giving the victim hot spring from the first underground floor of Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government so that the victim may not leave without the Defendants’ permission, and E, F, G, H, and I by monitoring that the damaged person does not leave the outside.

B. As the court below stated in detail on the grounds of the judgment of innocence, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone alone was proved to the extent that it was impossible or extremely difficult to move in the Defendant A’s residence due to psychological or intangible disorder, such as drinking, etc. caused by the assault or intimidation of the Defendants, etc.

The prosecutor's assertion of mistake is without merit, since it is insufficient to view it and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

3. Although the determination of the unjust assertion of sentencing is based on the following: (a) although there is no much age of the Defendants and there is no record of criminal punishment in the case of Defendant A; (b) each of the crimes of this case is committed with the minor accomplices under the lead of the adult Defendants.