2. This case is a case in which the defendant has induced the disabled victim for sexual intercourse, and its nature is not good.

In this case, even though the victim was suffering from a considerable mental shock and after going through legacy, etc., the victim did not take any measures to recover damage, and the victim wanted to be punished by the defendant.

However, it is necessary for the defendant to protect his family with poor health conditions, such as suffering from cerebral illness and dementia symptoms, etc., and living an economically difficult life as a recipient of basic living benefits. The crime of this case seems to have affected a certain degree of mental symptoms of the defendant, the confession of the crime and the depth of the mistake. Although it is difficult to recover specific damage, it seems that the defendant made efforts to seek relief from the victim, such as finding the victim in difficult circumstances, it seems that he did not have any other criminal history except the punishment history due to these crimes, such as suspension of the execution of imprisonment without prison labor for a period of 194 and a fine for around two times in 2004, and there is no other criminal history other than the punishment history due to these crimes, and the defendant's age, sex, sex, environment, motive and background of the crime, method and method of the crime, etc., and the records and circumstances after the crime of this case. Thus, the court below's assertion that the punishment of this case cannot be reversed to the extent that it is unreasonable.

3. The appeal by the prosecutor of the conclusion is without merit and is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.