All judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant

A Imprisonment with labor for a maximum of two years and six months, for a short of two years, and Defendant X.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A had the ability to discern things or make decisions under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the instant sexual assault crime. Defendant A was in a state of mental disorder which lacks the ability to discern things or make decisions.

B. The lower court’s punishment (Defendant A and X: each imprisonment of a maximum of two years and six months, a short of two years, and Defendant Y: imprisonment of a maximum of six months, and a short of four months) is too heavy.

2. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the above reasons for appeal.

A. First of all, the Defendants’ application of the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act to the Defendants, the Defendants’ punishment of imprisonment with prison labor for a maximum of one year, short of eight months, and imprisonment with prison labor for a defendant X for special larceny, etc. on July 2, 2015, at the Seosan Branch of the Daejeon District Court, with prison labor for a maximum of ten years, with prison labor for a short of eight months, with prison labor for a defendant X, and with prison labor for a maximum of ten months, with prison labor for a short of eight months, and with the above judgment finalized on November 6, 2015. As such, the crime of the first instance judgment against the Defendants and the above special larceny of the second instance judgment against the Defendants, for which the judgment of the lower court became final and conclusive under Article 37 of the Criminal Act, should be sentenced to concurrent crimes under the first sentence of Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act, and thus, the lower court’s judgment against the Defendants cannot be maintained as it is.

B. Following the consolidation of the first and second decisions with respect to Defendant A, and the first and second judgments with respect to Defendant A, and the first and second judgments with respect to Defendant A filed an appeal with respect to each of the above judgments of the court below, and this court decided to hold a joint hearing with respect to the two appeals. The first and second decisions with respect to the above Defendant are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and one sentence should be imposed in accordance with Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. In this regard, the first and second decisions of the court below are made.