The judgment below

Of them, the part against Defendant C shall be reversed.

Defendant

C A person shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

However, the defendant.

The summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable for the lower court’s punishment against the Defendants (the 4 years of imprisonment for each of Defendant A and B, the 3 years of imprisonment for each of Defendant C, and the Defendants: each of the 80 hours of sexual assault treatment programs).

Judgment

Defendant

As to the Defendants’ wrongful assertion of sentencing A and B, the circumstances favorable to the Defendants are as follows: (a) the Defendants led to the instant crime; (b) the victim did not want the punishment against the Defendants by mutual agreement with the victim; (c) the Defendants were the primary offender; and (d) the family-friendly relationship appears to be relatively publicly announced by the Defendants, such as the Defendants’ birth of their family-friendly relationship with the Defendants.

However, the crime of this case is deemed to have been committed by the Defendants in combination with the Defendants at the main place of the crime of this case, and it is extremely poor that they committed rape by gathering the victims who have lost their mind. ② The Defendant was aware of the Defendants at a high school or workplace ship in the outside place without any particular social experience, and was believed to have been aware of the Defendants’ belief. The Defendants made the Defendants to enter the Defendant at their place of the crime and had them participated in the crime. ③ The Defendant appears to have suffered considerable mental shock and pain by the crime of this case, including the fact that the victims were suffering from considerable mental shock and pain. In full view of all the circumstances, such as the age, sex, environment, circumstances, the circumstances of the crime of this case, the circumstances after the crime of this case, etc., the judgment of the court below is unreasonable, and there is no reason to deem the above Defendants’ assertion to be unfair.

Defendant

C As to the wrongful argument of sentencing, the crime of this case is deemed to have been quasi-rapeed by the victim who is in an impossible condition to resist with the defendant.