Defendant

All appeals filed by A and B and prosecutor against the Defendants are dismissed.

. The applicant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A and B1 of misunderstanding of facts (Defendant B) did not have conspired with Defendant A and C of misunderstanding of facts or deceiving the victim. Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty erred by misapprehending the facts. 2) The sentence of the court below is too unreasonable and unfair.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence (one and half years of imprisonment for each of the defendants A and B, and two years of suspended sentence in one and half years of imprisonment for each of the defendants C) is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. The victim's statement of the victim's assertion of mistake of facts against the defendant B is consistent with the main contents of the statement in light of the empirical rule, and there is no unreasonable or contradictory part of the statement in itself in light of the empirical rule, and as long as the motive or reason to make the statement unfavorable to the defendant is not clearly revealed, the defendant's statement should not be rejected without permission on the ground that there is a change of the part which appears to be inconsistent with the minor part due to the difference in the expression, or the initial conclusive statement was changed to a somewhat unclear statement.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Do5407, Nov. 23, 2006). The evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, and in particular, according to the I and J’s investigative agencies, the victim’s witness, and the testimony at the court below, the facts charged of the instant case can be fully acknowledged.

On the other hand, Defendant B asserts that the victim I denied the defendant's recruitment in the court of original trial, and that there is no credibility in the above witness's statement.

However, considering the following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below in light of the legal principles as seen earlier, the above witness’s statement is deemed to have credibility, and thus, the defendant’s above assertion cannot be accepted.

(1) The victims shall be consistent in full from each investigative agency to each court of original trial.