A. At around 21:00 on September 23, 2014, the Defendant: (a) attempted to have a sexual intercourse with the victim and to be exempted from the clothes of the victim; (b) was rejected by the victim, such as the difference from the victim, and (c) was the victim’s refusal, the Defendant forced the victim’s clothes to be removed from the victim’s body and forced the victim’s body, divided the victim’s body into the Defendant’s body, breaking the victim’s body into a single sexual intercourse.

B. At around 23:00 on October 2, 2014, the Defendant tried to hold the victim’s clothes in the room of the above residence, and tried to have a sexual intercourse with the victim, and the victim strongly resisted, and when the victim resisted, the Defendant made several times in several times to impule the victim’s clothes, and “I am fecencencencencencencencencenc,” “I am fecencencencenc, after the cencencencation,” and “I ambencencencencenc,” etc. “I am back the victim’s clothes by coercioning the victim’s resistance and sexual intercourse once by means of the method as referred to in paragraph (1).”

2. The victim alleged that the defendant had always been aware that the defendant had to demand sexual intercourse and responded to sexual relationship.

At the time of each of the facts charged in the instant case, the Defendant, not by using violence or intimidation, was off from the clothes of the victim, and made a sexual relation with the victim’s sexual intercourse.

The victim does not have sufficient force to make the defendant forced to enter into a sexual intercourse with his full force, but rather, he is the defendant in the ordinary court.