Defendant

In addition, all appeals filed by the respondent A, the defendant B, and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Of the case of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles (Defendant A) 1 2016 Gohap5, the crime No. 1 of the judgment of the court below

(a).

(c).

The defendant and the person subject to a request to attach an attachment order (hereinafter referred to as the "defendant") do not have to instruct the victim to have sexual intercourse or to have sexual intercourse with the victim as stated in the facts charged in the judgment of the defendant B.

In the case of the crime No. 1-C and (d) of the judgment, there was no such act itself, or the defendant A was not involved in it.

In addition, there is no fact that the victim has defiled the drug with deep diving or lost the mind, and therefore, it constitutes violence in the crime of rape.

Although it is difficult to recognize the commencement of enforcement, the judgment of the court below which found the guilty of this part of the facts charged is erroneous by misapprehending the legal principles.

2. Criminal facts No. 1-2 of the Judgment of the court below among the cases 2016Gohap5

E. It cannot be deemed that there was assault and intimidation to the extent that the crime of rape was established, and there was no sexual intercourse with the victim at the time.

3) Of the 2016 High 5 cases, the receipt of money from No. 2-c. B of the criminal facts stated in the lower judgment does not necessarily mean that money was paid by gambling. B. The lower court’s respective sentence against the Defendants (Defendant A 8 years’ imprisonment and Defendant B three years’ imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2 The lower court’s sentence against Defendant A of the Prosecutor is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the misconception of facts and misapprehension of legal principles by Defendant A

A. Criminal facts No. 1 of the judgment of the court below among the cases of 2016Gohap5

(a).

The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined in the first instance court and the trial court, namely, Defendant A consistently from the investigation stage to the court of the original trial, to the trial, and Defendant A has consistently made a mobile phone case at the company, and in order to restore to the original state, Defendant A has affixed a face-to-face relationship with the victim.