All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The defendants' act of misconception of facts does not constitute an indecent act in a mere long run with the consent of the victim, and even if not, it does not violate the social rules, and thus, the judgment of the court below which convicted the defendants of the facts is erroneous.

B. The lower court’s sentence against the Defendants on unreasonable sentencing (the completion of the sexual assault treatment program with a fine of one million won and forty hours) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court regarding the assertion of mistake, the facts that the Defendants, A, and B committed an indecent act against the victim by taking advantage of the victim’s failure to resist, and the Defendants’ above act does not violate the social rules.

The above assertion by the Defendants is without merit.

B. Compared to the first instance court’s judgment on the assertion of unfair sentencing, there is no change in the sentencing conditions, and the sentencing of the first instance court is not beyond the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). Based on the foregoing legal doctrine, the lower court, based on the foregoing legal doctrine, determined the sentence by comprehensively taking account of the various circumstances as stated in its reasoning.

In addition to the circumstances indicated by the lower court, no new circumstance exists to change the sentence of the lower court in the trial, and even considering all the sentencing factors indicated in the pleadings of the instant case, such as the Defendants’ age, character and conduct, environment, motive and means of crime, and circumstances after the crime, the sentencing of the lower court does not seem to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

The above assertion by the Defendants is without merit.

3. As such, the Defendants’ appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, since all of the appeals are without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.