The judgment below

Of them, the remainder except for “the part not guilty against Defendant A” in all cases.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendants and the persons against whom the attachment order was requested (hereinafter referred to as the “defendants”), and each “Defendant and the person against whom the attachment order was requested” are referred to as the “Defendants”) 1 of misunderstanding of facts [related to the Defendant’s violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (hereinafter referred to as “violations against the Act on the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes”) by July 5, 2012] Defendant A (hereinafter referred to as the “Defendants”), Defendant A (hereinafter referred to as “Defendants”), the victim I (hereinafter referred to as “victims, 20 years of age, and hereinafter referred to as “victims”) did not have a mental retardation to the extent that they

(2) The Defendant did not exercise the right of force against the victim, and the victim has sexual intercourse with C according to his own free will, and the Defendant did not agree with the victim to sexual intercourse with C.

B) Defendant B (hereinafter “Defendant”) did not invite the victim to engage in sexual intercourse, and did not share the act of implementation by stating that “I would have to make a mistake.” C) Defendant C (hereinafter “Defendant”) (hereinafter “Defendant”) had sexual intercourse with the victim, or the victim did not have a mental health condition. Even if so, the Defendant did not know of the victim’s mental health condition.

(2) The Defendant did not exercise any form of force in a sexual relationship with the victim.

2) Each sentence of the lower court on the Defendants of unfair sentencing (the three years of imprisonment, the three years of imprisonment, the two years of imprisonment, and the two years and six months of imprisonment) is unfair. B. The prosecutor’s 1) by mistake of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles (related to the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (hereinafter “Defendant”) by the Defendant A (hereinafter “Defendant”) on July 2, 2012), and the following circumstances acknowledged by evidence, namely, ① the victim was absent at the time and was aground in the Defendant’s residence.