All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. The lower court convicted Defendant A of the facts charged of the instant case.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the “joint principal offender” in the crime of violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (hereinafter “Juvenile Protection Act”), “presumptive consent” and “non-competing impossible,” “violation of the Act on the Protection of Juveniles from Sexual Abuse (Quasi-rape), and the violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc.

The issue of whether to adopt the application for examination of evidence may not be examined when the court deems it unnecessary at the discretion of the court (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Do7947, Jan. 27, 2011). Thus, even if the court below did not adopt the defendant's application for examination of evidence, it cannot be deemed unlawful.

2. Defendant B’s assertion that the lower court’s judgment erred in incomplete deliberation on the grounds for sentencing constitutes an allegation of unfair sentencing.

According to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment or imprisonment without prison labor for not less than ten years is imposed, an appeal may be filed on the ground

Therefore, in this case where the defendant was sentenced to a more minor punishment, the argument that the above assertion or punishment is too unreasonable is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

3. The Defendants’ final appeal is dismissed in entirety as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.