The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for five years.

Sexual assault, 80 hours against the defendant.

1. The court below found not guilty of the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes, which is the primary charge, and found guilty of the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes, which is the ancillary charge.

As to this, the defendant filed an appeal against the guilty portion, and the prosecutor also filed an appeal on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing only for the guilty portion, but did not file an appeal against the innocent portion of the above grounds.

In such a case, the part of acquittal in the reasoning is also judged to the appellate court along with the part of conviction in accordance with the principle of non-guilty appeal. However, the part of acquittal in the reason is already excluded from the object of attack and defense between the parties, and thus, it cannot be judged again

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2004Do5014, Oct. 28, 2004; Supreme Court Decision 2009Do12934, Jan. 14, 2010). Therefore, the lower court’s conclusion as to the acquittal portion on the above grounds is to be followed, and the scope of the trial of this court is limited to the part that the lower court found the Defendant guilty.

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) The Defendant instigated the Defendant to have sexual intercourse with the victim D (hereinafter “victim”), and the Defendant and C cannot be deemed to have committed quasi-rape in collaboration with the victim.

B) It cannot be deemed that there is a proximate causal relationship between the Defendant’s act and the injury suffered by the victim. (2) The lower court’s sentence of unfair sentencing (five years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.

3. We examine ex officio the judgment on the grounds for appeal ex officio (revision of indictment).

The prosecutor shall add Article 59-3 (1) of the Act on Welfare of Persons with Disabilities to the applicable provisions of Acts in the trial.