성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(장애인준강간)
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four years.
For a period of seven years, information about the defendant.
1. The gist of the grounds of appeal is that the victim cannot exercise his/her right to sexual self-determination at the time of the instant case, since he/she had mental disorders although he/she had a mental disorder, and there is almost
The defendant and the person who requested an attachment order (hereinafter referred to as "defendant") shall not have sexual intercourse with the victim by taking advantage of the victim's incompetence.
Therefore, it cannot be viewed as quasi-rape for the disabled who has sexual intercourse with the victim's act in a situation where it is difficult to resist due to mental disability.
2. Determination on the part of the case of the defendant
A. 1) The lower court’s determination on the grounds of appeal is based on the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, i.e., the following facts found by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court: ① the victim was registered as a class 2 disabled person in light of the intellectual disability around 207; the victim was determined as a class 2 mental disability in the psychological examination conducted on April 21, 2010; ② the victim was aware of the victim’s mental disability at the time of his/her school creativity or at the church.
I and H cannot be deemed to have expressed an easy and normal expression of the victim's words, which fall short of the ordinary person's sense and decentralization, and which are easy to believe another person's words.
The facts stated, ③ the mother of the victim and the her mother are intellectually disabled persons, and the defendant started with the 17-year old educational system around 2009 and maintained de facto marital relations from around 2010. ④ The victim talked with the neighboring persons, including the defendant, about the fact that the victim had a ear to the victim, and that the defendant made a ear to the victim or had a ear to drive away from ear. ⑤ The victim stated in the court below that “the defendant had a sexual intercourse with the defendant as to the situation in which the defendant was sexual intercourse with the defendant, and without any choice to have a early sexual relationship with the defendant.” The victim made a phone call from the defendant to confirm the talk.