All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. The lower court’s sentencing is too unreasonable on the grounds of appeal.

2. It is recognized that the Defendants are divided into one’s mistake, that Defendant E came into existence and agreed with the victim, and Defendant B’s attempted quasi-rape for which the judgment of the instant case became final and conclusive, and that there should be consideration of equity with the case where the judgment should be rendered simultaneously in accordance with Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act, in relation to the concurrent crimes between Defendant B and the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act.

However, there is no good character of the crime of this case; the Defendants committed the crime of this case again even though they had the same criminal record; Defendant E committed the crime of this case again during the period of repeated crime of the same kind; Defendant B committed the crime of this case; Defendant B did not receive any restoration or agreement until the trial is in the first instance trial; considering the balance of sentencing with the co-defendants of the court below, the degree of the Defendants’ participation, the age, sex and environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime of this case; and considering the conditions of sentencing specified in the arguments of this case, such as the circumstances after the crime of this case, the court below’s punishment is too unreasonable; thus, the Defendants’ aforementioned assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendants' appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendants' appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.