The part of the case of the defendant (including the part not guilty) shall be reversed.

Defendant

A shall be sentenced to four years of imprisonment;

A. The Defendant and the person who requested the attachment order and the Defendant’s sentence [the Defendant and the person who requested the attachment order (hereinafter “Defendant”): Imprisonment with prison labor for 6 years, 80 hours, 5 years, 80 hours, 80 hours, 5 years, 80 hours, 5 years, 80 hours, 5 years, 3 years, 80 hours, 80 hours, 5 years, 80 hours, 5 years, 80 hours, 80 hours, 5 years] are too unreasonable.

B. The prosecutor 1) According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor of the fact-finding, despite the fact-finding that the charges of violating the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes against Defendants A and C (Rape of Minors under the age of 13) and the violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes against the Defendants are proved, the court below acquitted the Defendants of this part of the charges by misunderstanding the facts.

2) The lower court’s unfair sentencing and dismissal of a request for an attachment order is unfair, and it is unreasonable for the lower court to dismiss the request for an attachment order filed by Defendant A.

2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts

A. Judgment on Defendant A 1) The summary of this part of the facts charged is as stated in Article 1-A(1) of the judgment of the court below on the charge of violating the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Rape of minors under the age of 13).

On this basis, the court below proved that there is no reasonable doubt that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone sufficient for the victim to have committed violence or intimidation to the extent that it is difficult to resist or resist the victim.

In light of various circumstances such as Defendant A’s age and medical history, there is sufficient room for Defendant A to have attempted to commit an attempted crime and the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone was proved to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt that Defendant A had reached the period of sexual intercourse.

It judged that it was insufficient to view it.

Examining the judgment of the court below compared with the evidence.