All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed on February 13, 2019).

For the reasons indicated in its holding, the lower court convicted all the Defendants of the charges.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence inconsistent with logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the establishment and intent of a special quasi-rape as prescribed in Article 4(3) and (1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment,

Although Defendants asserted to the effect that the Defendants’ right to defense was infringed due to the lack of specification of the facts charged, it is not a legitimate ground of appeal since they asserted that the Defendants were either the grounds for appeal or the lower court did not have decided ex officio.

Furthermore, even if examining the relevant legal principles and records, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the specification of the facts charged.

According to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment or imprisonment without prison labor for more than ten years is imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed. Thus, in this case where a more minor sentence is imposed against the Defendants, the argument that the punishment is too unreasonable is not a legitimate ground for

Therefore, all appeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.