2. Article 299 of the Criminal Act provides that a person who has sexual intercourse or commits an indecent act by taking advantage of the person’s mental disorder or state of non-performance to resist shall be punished as the crime of rape or indecent act under Articles 297 and 298 of the Criminal Act.

Here, the state of refusal to resist refers to a case where psychological or physical resistance is absolutely impossible or considerably difficult due to the reason other than the defect in accordance with Articles 297 and 298 of the Criminal Code.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Do2631, Jun. 28, 2012). The burden of proving the facts charged in a criminal trial lies on a prosecutor.

Recognition of guilt shall be based on evidence of probative value, which makes it possible for a judge to have the conviction that the facts charged are true to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt.

If there is no such evidence, there is doubt that the defendant is guilty.

Even if there is no choice but to judge the interests of the defendant.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2001Do2823, Aug. 21, 2001). 3. Examining the evidence submitted by the Prosecutor, the following circumstances can be acknowledged.

In full view of this, it is recognized that the defendant has sexual intercourse with the victim without the consent of the victim at the time and place stated in the facts charged.

(1) The Defendant has sexual intercourse with the victim without confirming the victim’s intention at the time and place stated in the facts charged.

Until the defendant started sexual intercourse, the victim was in a state where he was locked and locked.

② The Defendant and the victim returned to Korea around August 6, 2013.