A. The victim of mistake of facts (the defendant) was not in the state of failing to resist at the time when the defendant was sexual intercourse with the defendant, and the victim was placed in preference to the defendant and had sexual intercourse with the defendant in response thereto. Thus, the defendant did not have the negligence of quasi-rape.

Nevertheless, the court below found the defendant guilty on the grounds of the statement of the victim without credibility. The court below erred by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. (1) The sentence of the lower court (one year and six months of imprisonment, and three years of suspended execution) is too unreasonable.

(2) The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. On the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts, the lower court argued to the same purport as the Defendant alleged in this part of the grounds for appeal, and the lower court, which was conducted as a participatory trial, went through a verdict of conviction (five criminal charges, two not guilty) pursuant to the Majority Opinion, and the circumstances acknowledged by the legal doctrine as stated in its reasoning and the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, namely, ① the victim was string down on the alleyway with the string of the string of the string of the string of the string of the string of the string of the string of the string of the 2nd of the 2nd of the 2nd of the 2nd of the 30th of the 2nd of the 2nd of the 2nd of the 30th of the 2nd of the 30th of the 2nd of the 30th of the 1st of the 2nd of the 2nd of the 2nd of the 2nd of the 2nd of the 2nd of the 2nd of the 2nd of the 2nd of the 3rd.