Defendant

In addition, both the respondent for attachment order and the prosecutor's appeal are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant and the person subject to a request to attach an attachment order (hereinafter “Defendant”) asserted the misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles as to Defendant BA, the Defendant did not rape the victim, conspired to arrange sexual traffic, did not encourage or force the victim to engage in sexual traffic, and did not assault the victim on the ground that he did not have committed sexual traffic, the lower court convicted the Defendant on the basis of the victim’s statement that is not reliable. In so doing, the lower court erred by misunderstanding of facts or misapprehending of legal principles.

B) The lower court’s sentence (one year of imprisonment, ten years of disclosure and notification order, and 120 hours of order to complete a sexual assault treatment program) on the ground of unfair sentencing is too unreasonable. (2) Although Defendant C did not have sexual intercourse with the victim by means of a deceptive scheme, etc., even if sexual intercourse was made, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the above part of the charges on the grounds of the statement of the victim without credibility. (b) The lower court’s sentence (one year of imprisonment, eight years of disclosure and notification order, ten years of order, and 120 hours of order to complete a sexual assault treatment program) on the ground of unfair sentencing is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor 1) The lower court’s punishment against the Defendants in the part of the Defendant case is too unfasible and unfair. 2) The lower court’s dismissal of the Defendant’s request for attachment order even if the Defendants acknowledged the recidivism risk of sexual crimes in the part of the case claiming attachment order.

2. Determination

A. 1) In determining the credibility of the statements made by the victim, etc. supporting the facts charged, the court of the relevant legal principles, as well as whether the contents of the statements themselves conform to the rationality, logic, morality, or rule of experience, or conforms to the statements made by a third party, as well as the form or attitude of the witness who is given a statement in the open court after being sworn in the presence of a judge, after being sworn.