All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. The lower court affirmed the first instance judgment convicting Defendant A of the instant facts charged, on the grounds stated in its reasoning of appeal.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on crimes of violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes.

The argument that the court below erred in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the defendant's mental disorder, detention procedure, illegality of investigation procedure, discretion of statement, infringement of right of defense, etc. is asserted only in the final appeal against the defendant's appeal or the court below's decision did not include the subject of judgment ex officio. Thus, the appeal is not legitimate

The argument that the lower court’s failure to deliberate on the determination of sentencing constitutes an unfair determination of sentencing.

According to Article 383 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for not less than ten years is imposed, an appeal shall be allowed on the grounds of unfair sentencing.

In this case where a more minor sentence is imposed against the defendant, the argument that the punishment is too unreasonable is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

2. The argument that there was an error of misunderstanding of the legal principles in the judgment of the court below as to the grounds for appeal by Defendant B is not a legitimate ground for appeal since the defendant alleged that there was no error in the misapprehension of the legal principles in the judgment of the court below as to the grounds for appeal by Defendant B

The argument that the lower court’s failure to deliberate on the determination of sentencing constitutes an unfair determination of sentencing.

Accordingly, according to Article 383 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, death penalty, life imprisonment, or not less than ten years.