In regard to this, only the defendant appealed against the guilty portion, and the prosecutor's dismissal portion is separated or finalized as it is, so only the guilty portion of the judgment below belongs to the scope of the judgment of this court.

misunderstanding of the facts and misapprehension of the legal principles on the grounds of appeal, the defendant did not rape the victim, in agreement with the victim, only when the defendant was sexually in a car other than the defendant's studio.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of violating the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse, is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

The punishment sentenced by the court below (three years of imprisonment, confiscation, and 80 hours of completion of sexual assault treatment programs) is too unreasonable.

Judgment

The lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged on the grounds of the Defendant’s confession statement, etc.

The court’s determination-related legal principles are determined based on the specific situation in which the victim was faced at the time of sexual intercourse, taking into account not only the content and degree of the assault and intimidation, but also the background leading up to exercising force, the relationship with the victim, and the circumstances of the sexual intercourse at the time of sexual intercourse and the subsequent circumstances. From an ex post perspective, the perpetrator’s assault and intimidation did not amount to the extent that the perpetrator’s resistance was significantly difficult solely on the ground that the victim was able to escape the scene of the crime before sexual intercourse or the victim did not resist due to his/her own force.

There shall be no way to readily conclude (Supreme Court Decision 2005Do3071 Decided July 28, 2005).