The judgment below

The guilty part against the Defendants is reversed.

Defendant

A, Defendant B, who was sentenced to imprisonment of one year and eight months.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendants 1) In relation to each crime under the misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, the lower court acknowledged the facts of the crime by citing the statements of E and D as the main evidence. However, each of the statements in E and D investigative agencies and courts exists before and after, and at the same time, there exists any inconsistency or change, and there is no credibility because they are contrary to objective facts. Therefore, the lower court erred in its acknowledgement

Although there was a statement by the witness P of the lower court that the female filed a false or exaggerated complaint for the purpose of mutual agreement, it is also erroneous that the female did not accept the statement.

A) Defendant A did not engage in sexual traffic with D (tentative name) as stated in the judgment below, as stated in Section 1-B of the crime committed in the judgment below.

Defendant

B There is no fact of engaging in E and sexual traffic, such as the crime No. 2-A of the judgment below.

B) As to the crime of paragraph 3(a) of the judgment of the court below in relation to the mediation of sexual traffic as stated in the judgment of the court below, the defendant A was committed only due to the relationship between H and I with "G" Maz.

No one shall arrange, etc. sexual traffic for business purposes in collusion with H, etc.

② With respect to the crime of the 3-B navigational crime in the judgment of the original court, the Defendants did not arrange sexual intercourse in the workplace or K where “G”, which is a sexual traffic business establishment, and did not engage in sexual intercourse. Therefore, there was no fact that the Defendants arranged sexual intercourse by way of sexual intercourse.

C) The Defendants did not commit an indecent act by force or an indecent act by special force on the date and time indicated in Articles 5, 6, and 7 of the lower judgment’s holding that the Defendants committed an indecent act by force or by special force.

2) The punishment of the lower court (Defendant A: imprisonment of 2 years and 6 months, completion of the sexual assault treatment program for 40 hours, collection of 3.8 million won, Defendant B: imprisonment of 2 years, suspended execution of 3 years, 40 hours, sexual assault treatment program course for 120 hours, 3.8 million won, and additional collection of 3.8 million won) is too unreasonable.

B. A prosecutor (as regards Defendant A), 1) misunderstanding the fact (in the case of rape (in the case of preliminary rape) against D.