However, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant is erroneous in misconception of facts.

On July 201, the Defendant became aware of the victim C(n, 23 years of age) of intellectual disability 2 in front of his/her residence every day. After having become aware of the victim C(n, 23 years of age), the Defendant became aware that he/she was a disabled person while having talked about D(2) of the victim and the victim’s intellectual disability 2 in his/her house with his/her house.

At around 08:00 on July 12, 201, the Defendant discovered a victim who was walking in the direction of the head of the Dong office to go to the welfare center in front of the Seo-gu Incheon Etel, Seo-gu, Incheon, and committed an indecent act by force against the victim by deceiving the victim's chest by his own hand.

On July 13, 2011, the victim, who was the disabled in Grade II of the lower court’s intellectual disability, stated that “The victim, at the time of the police investigation on July 13, 201, was forced to commit an indecent act in which the chest was sent to him/her from the gulle in the way where the welfare center was located at 8:00 a.m. on the street (the Defendant’s residential address),” and that “the victim, who was the disabled, went to his/her friende, went to the house.”

However, taking account of the following circumstances acknowledged by the record, even if the victim was forced to commit indecent acts by force from a group as stated in the facts charged, there is doubt as to whether the victim committed an indecent act by force, and therefore, the evidence alone, such as the victim’s statement, presented by the prosecutor, is insufficient to deem that the facts charged in the instant case, to the extent that there is no reasonable

① The victim got off the way that the welfare center was opened at the home around the date and time indicated in the facts charged of the instant case, and went off with the Defendant several times.