All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) The statements by the victims who seem to be fit for each of the facts charged in the instant case are deemed to have high probative value to the extent that there is little room to suspect the truth and accuracy of the contents.

It is difficult to see that the remaining evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is proved to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt about each of the facts charged in this case.

It is difficult to see it.

Even so, the lower court found all of the facts charged of this case guilty on the basis of the statements of the victims with no credibility.

The court below erred in the misapprehension of facts.

2) The sentence sentenced by the lower court (one year and six months of imprisonment with prison labor, three years of suspended execution, and 240 hours of community service) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. The defendant asserted that the defendant's mistake of facts was identical to that of the above facts in the court below, and the court below rejected the above assertion in detail by clearly explaining the credibility of the statement made by the victims.

In light of the judgment below and the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, the judgment of the court below is justified.

The defendant's assertion of mistake is without merit.

3. It is reasonable to respect the sentencing conditions in cases where there is no change in the sentencing conditions compared to the original judgment regarding the unfair argument of sentencing by the defendant and the prosecutor, and where the original judgment does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). As new sentencing data is not submitted to the court, there is no particular change in the sentencing conditions compared with the original judgment.

The circumstances asserted by the defendant and the prosecutor on the grounds of appeal are considered to have taken into account all the circumstances in determining the punishment of the defendant.

In full view of the various sentencing conditions shown in the records and arguments, the lower court’s sentence exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.