A. misunderstanding of facts1) The victim did not have the state of mental disorder or impossibility to resist at the time of the instant case. 2) The victim voluntarily responded to the sex relationship with the Defendant by having the Defendant fit, and the Defendant did not recognize that the victim was in a state of mental disorder or to resist, and there was no intention of quasi-rape seeking sexual intercourse by using the same.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (three years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) On the ground of the legal principles and circumstances set forth in its reasoning, the lower court rejected the Defendant’s assertion on mistake of facts in light of the following circumstances: (i) the Defendant alleged to the same effect as the grounds for appeal in this part; (ii) on the basis of the legal principles and circumstances set forth in its reasoning, the victim was in a situation where the victim was under the influence of alcohol and was extremely difficult to resist the Defendant’s sexual conduct; and (iii) the Defendant was aware of such circumstances and had sexual intercourse with the victim; and (iv) the lower court’s aforementioned determination is just and acceptable in light of the following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court. In so doing, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine as alleged by

Therefore, this part of the Defendant’s assertion cannot be accepted. A) According to the Defendant’s motion picture (CH0 on January 26, 2019, 05:19, 06:15, 07: 06: CH2, CH3 video on January 26, 2019, CH2, and 142, and 143, the Defendant’s motion picture on the crosswalk adjacent to a singing room refers to “CH1”, “CH2”, “CH3”, “CH2”, and “CH4”, the external image of a singing room is referred to as “CH3” and “CH4”.

(hereinafter the same shall apply)

According to the above, ...