All appeals by the Defendants and the Prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence that the court below sentenced the Defendants to the defendants (4 months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. Each of the above forms of the lower court’s judgment is deemed to be too unhued and unreasonable.

2. It is desirable to refrain from rendering a sentence that does not change the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, if the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion. Although the sentence of sentencing of the first instance court falls within the reasonable scope of discretion, it is desirable to refrain from rendering a sentence that does not vary with the first instance court judgment on the sole ground of the difference between the opinion of the appellate court and the opinion of the appellate court (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). In light of the aforementioned legal principles, the lower court’s purport that the above evidence was attempted to commit sexual assault by the police officer controlling the contents of the above evidence, which is not particularly good. The Defendants recognized the crime of this case. In relevant cases, the lower court’s testimony was determined within a reasonable scope by fully considering all the circumstances surrounding the sentencing of the Defendants, such as the fact that the above evidence did not affect the outcome of the trial, and thus, it is reasonable to have determined the punishment within a reasonable scope without any changes in the original judgment.

Therefore, we cannot accept the defendants' and prosecutor's argument of sentencing.

3. In conclusion, the appeal by the Defendants and the public prosecutor is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, since all of the appeals by the Defendants and the public prosecutor are without merit. It is so decided as per