1. The lower court, on October 17, 201, rendered a judgment on the grounds of the public prosecutor’s grounds of appeal on the instant facts charged, on the grounds that there was no proof of a crime regarding the part concerning quasi-rape in violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (hereinafter “Sexual Crimes Punishment Act”), and rendered a judgment of the first instance that acquitted the Defendant on the grounds that there was no proof of a crime regarding the part concerning quasi-rape in violation of the Sexual Violence Punishment Act (rape in relation to relatives) on October 14, 2017, and upheld the judgment of the first instance court that acquitted the Defendant on the ground that there was no proof of a crime regarding the part concerning the violation of the Sexual Violence Punishment Act (rape in relation to relatives), which is the ancillary

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the record, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the commencement of commission in the crime of quasi-rape and indecent act by compulsion in the crime of indecent act by compulsion.

2. The lower court convicted the Defendant of the violation of the Sexual Violence Punishment Act on October 14, 2017 among the facts charged in the instant case.

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 against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on indecent act, defectiveness, or insufficient failure to resist.

3. The final appeal by the prosecutor and the defendant is all dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.