All of the appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfairness) Defendants’ crime of this case is that Defendant A, who had sexual intercourse with the victim who was under the influence of alcohol by Defendant A, once again had sexual intercourse with Defendant B, and the victim is deemed to have been sexual intercourse again with Defendant B. In light of the nature of the crime, bad, and the circumstances where the mental suffering of the victim caused by the Defendants’ crime is very serious, the sentencing of the first instance court sentenced to a suspended sentence of three years to the Defendants is too unreasonable.

2. The court’s determination of the sentence that is unfair under Article 361-5 subparag. 15 of the Criminal Procedure Act means that the exercise of discretionary power to judge is unfair to the extent that it is permitted to exercise discretion. Ultimately, it means that the exercise of discretionary power to judge is inappropriate, starting from the type of punishment to the sentence through the applicable sentences, thereby causing unfair penalty.

Based on the statutory penalty, the sentencing is a unique area of the sentencing judgment of the first instance court, based on the trial-oriented principle and the principle of directness, which is based on the discretion of judges that take into account the conditions of sentencing prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act within a reasonable and appropriate scope.

Therefore, considering the circumstances where the illegality of the judgment of the court of first instance is proven in view of the fact that the court of first instance restricts the character as a inner part of the appellate court and imposes an element as an ex post facto review, it is necessary to reverse the judgment of the court of first instance only where the illegality of the judgment of the court of first instance is proven. As a result of the review of whether the sentencing of the court of first instance is unfair, it is necessary

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). The instant crime committed by Defendant A has sexual intercourse with a victim who lost consciousness by drinking the victim at his own home.