All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles - Defendant A, D, E, on the other hand, Defendant B, and C’s defense counsel submitted the statement of grounds of appeal to the effect that the sentencing is unfair as they led to the confession of the instant crime on September 30, 2014. The above Defendants and their defense counsel also made a statement to the same effect as the grounds of appeal on the first trial date.

However, on December 4, 2014, after the date of the appeal brief, the above Defendants, on December 4, 2014, submitted a defense counsel’s opinion to the same effect as Defendant A, D, and E’s statement of grounds for appeal, stating that “No part of the crimes of this case shall be recognized,” and the previous confession was reversed on the third trial date of the trial of the court of first instance. The said Defendants’ defense counsel submitted a written statement to the same effect as “the Defendant and G make a coercive speech and behavior jointly with the Defendant, or the Defendants made an assault or threat against the victim,” on December 16, 2014, and the said Defendants and their defense counsel stated that the said Defendants and their defense counsel made a statement of counsel’s opinion on December 16, 2014 at the fourth trial date of the trial of the court of first instance on December 18, 2014, to urge ex officio judgment.

Although there was a fact that the Defendants had sexual intercourse with the victim, the Defendants did not have conspired to rape the victim, and there was no fact that the rest of the Defendants did not share in the conduct of special rape by viewing the network or monitoring the victims when the Defendants committed sexual intercourse.

In addition, in the course of sexual intercourse with the victim, the Defendants did not exercise assault and threat to the degree that it is impossible or considerably difficult to resist the victim, and there was no intention to sexual intercourse with the victim by assault and threat to such degree.

Nevertheless, the court below found the Defendants guilty, and there is an error of misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles.

B. Unreasonable sentencing - The lower court sentenced the Defendants respectively.