All appeals filed by the Defendants and the Prosecutor are dismissed.

I. Summary of the grounds for appeal

1. Grounds for appeal by the Defendants

A. There was no intention or conspiracy to commit a mistake of facts (the defendant B and C's assertion) 1) in a public offering, and there was no intention or conspiracy of quasi-rape. 2) The defendant C had a criminal defendant B at the scene where the defendant C had sexual intercourse with the victim.

Even if the two defendants shared the act of execution, it can not be viewed that the two defendants shared the act.

3) In light of the victim’s statement to the effect that the victim was unable to resist and the evidence submitted to the Defendants (the vehicle booms image, voice, recording, etc.), the victim was not in the state of mental disorder or failing to resist. B. The judgment of the court below against the Defendants (the Defendant B, C: three years of imprisonment, four years of suspended execution, four years of sexual assault treatment program participation, 40 hours of imprisonment, 8 months of suspended execution, one year of suspended execution, and one year of suspended execution is too unreasonable.

2. Grounds for appeal by a prosecutor;

A. The lower court acquitted the Defendant of this part of the facts charged on the ground that: (a) Defendant A, who is an accomplice, had sexual intercourse with the victim in a state of failing to resist; and (b) attempted to insert the victim’s own sexual organ in the same manner as the victim was different; (c) although the victim was unable to have sexual intercourse with his/her shoulder or body, and did not have sexual intercourse with the wind to ask him/her, the lower court found the victim guilty of this part of the facts charged; (b) the lower court found the Defendant A guilty of this part of the facts charged on the ground that he/she had committed a “joint quasi-rape” by mistake of the fact; and (c) even if it was recognized that the Defendant A was in a joint quasi-rape relationship with B, C, and C,

B. The lower court’s sentence against the Defendants on the point of unfair sentencing (with respect to both the Defendants) is too unreasonable.

Ⅱ. Determination

1. Determination as to Defendant B and C’s assertion of mistake of facts

(a) Paragraph (2) of this Article shall apply to the defendant B and C as to the intention to quasi-rape and to resist the victim;