The judgment below

The part against the Defendants is reversed in entirety.

Defendant

A, and Defendant B, in the period of three years and six months, respectively.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable that the sentence imposed by the lower court to the Defendants is too unreasonable.

2. The judgment (In the grounds of appeal, Defendant A and D did not state the victim P at the time of the crime of joint quasi-rape in this case’s grounds of appeal, and the Defendants did not have a joint criminal relation in relation to the joint quasi-rape, and they withdrawn the allegation of mistake at the first instance court date. According to each evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below and the trial court, the facts constituting the crime in the judgment of the court below are recognized, and there is no ground for ex officio reversal in this part of the judgment of the court below. Thus, the above argument is not judged separately.)

A. The judgment ex officio (the part against Defendant A in the judgment of the lower court) was ex officio prior to the judgment on Defendant A’s assertion, and the Defendant A was a C student and was a juvenile under Article 2 of the Juvenile Act at the time of the declaration of the lower judgment, but became an adult in the trial.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below that sentenced the above defendant to be sentenced to an irregular sentence cannot be maintained any longer.

B. As to the Defendants’ assertion, the crime of violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (special quasi-rape) was committed on the part of the Defendants, when the Defendants first known to the victim P and singing places together with singing at the victim P and sing places, and the quality of the crime is not good. The crime was committed on the part of the above victims, and the above victims suffered a large mental impulse, the Defendants did not receive a letter from the above victims, and Defendant B committed the crime of larceny, other than the above crime, and Defendant A and D committed the crime of larceny by receiving money, and Defendant A and D directly committed the act of sexual intercourse in the crime of joint quasi-rape in this case. Defendant D had been detained and tried against other prisoners in the detention center.