1. On July 24, 2009, the Defendant sent D with sexual intercourse one time at the mutually aesthetic telecom in Eunpyeong-gu Seoul, Seoul.

2. On August 3, 2009, the Defendant sent to D’s house located in Seodaemun-gu Seoul, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, with the foregoing D’s sexual intercourse once.

3. On September 5, 2009, the Defendant, at the D’s house, had a sexual intercourse with D on a single occasion.

2. On February 26, 2015, the Constitutional Court rendered a decision that Article 241 of the Criminal Act, the applicable provisions of the charged facts of this case, is unconstitutional.

[The Constitutional Court Decision 209Hun-Ba17,205, 2010Hun-Ba194, 2011Hun-Ba4, 2012Hun-Ba4, 2012Hun-Ba5, 255, 411, 2013Hun-Ba139, 161, 267, 276, 342, 365, 2014Hun-Ba53, 464 (merged), 201Hun-Ba31, 2014Hun-Ga4, 2014Hun-Ga4 (Consolidated)) decided on February 26, 201] As a result of the decision of unconstitutionality, Article 241 of the Criminal Act is constitutional [The Constitutional Court Decision 2007Hun-Ga17 (Consolidated, October 30, 208] of the Constitutional Court Act, and retroactively invalidated its effect on October 31, 2008.

Where the penal law or legal provision becomes retroactively null and void due to the decision of unconstitutionality, the defendant's case which was prosecuted by applying the relevant provisions shall be limited to the case where it does not constitute a crime.

Therefore, the facts charged of this case constitute a crime and thus, the defendant is acquitted pursuant to the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the summary of the judgment against the defendant pursuant to Article 440 of the Criminal Procedure Act shall be announced as per Disposition.