The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendants shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

, however, from the date this judgment becomes final.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In relation to Defendant A’s sexual intercourse, there was no misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles that the Defendants conspiredd to rape the victim in a successive manner, there was no intention to co-processing, and there was no contribution to the conduct in a temporary and cooperative relationship.

In addition, with regard to Defendant B's sexual intercourse, there was no fact that Defendant B attempted to have the victim's bridge up on the wind that the victim was broken off, and that the sexual organ was inserted.

Nevertheless, the lower court convicted all of the charges of this case. The lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence of an unreasonable sentencing (the defendants) against the defendants (the three years of imprisonment, 120 hours of each sexual assault treatment lecture, and 5 years of each information disclosure notice) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The defendants asserted that the judgment of the court below is identical to the grounds for appeal in this part, and the court below rejected the above assertion in detail with the detailed statement of the judgment under the title "the judgment of the defendants and the defense counsel's assertion". In light of the above judgment of the court below compared with the records, the judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and the judgment of the court below does not seem to be erroneous in the misapprehension of the legal principles or misapprehension of the legal principles

In light of the fact that Defendant B’s panty did not detect the sperm or DNA type in the victim’s quality, the defense counsel asserts that there was no omission of the victim’s DNA type in the victim’s panty.

According to the table of the Korea Science Investigation Agency's request for appraisal, the victim's results are as follows: the victim's quality, whether the victim's panty is detected, and the DNA type analysis conducted by the defendant B.