In addition, all appeals filed by the respondent for attachment order and the prosecutor are dismissed.

A. In light of the following: (i) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles on the part of the Defendant and the person subject to a request to attach an attachment order (hereinafter “Defendant”), the victim divided the conversation with the Defendant on the Internet hosting site (N, C, etc.); (ii) N-rating in particular, even if the procedures, such as personal certification and small payment, are complicated and complicated, the victim divided the conversation with the Defendant via the above website; (iii) the victim himself/herself found the office of the Defendant who is a long distance using public transportation; and (iv) the victim reconsting the Defendant again after the first sexual intercourse, the Defendant was unaware of the fact that the victim was a intellectual disabled person; and (iii) there was no sexual intercourse or indecent act by inducing the victim with the intellectual disability by deceptive means.

【The sentencing of the lower court (three years of imprisonment, five years of disclosure and notification order) is too unreasonable.

B. The lower court’s sentencing is too unjustifiable.

2. Determination on the part of the defendant's case

A. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court as to the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts, it is acknowledged that ① the victim was divided into the Defendant’s dialogue via the Internet hosting site, ② the victim was found at the home of the Defendant’s long distance using public transportation, ③ the victim was driving the Defendant again after the first sexual intercourse.

However, taking full account of other circumstances acknowledged by the above evidence, namely, the fact that the victim did not know that it would be different, but putting the victim in a computer or the skin room at home (the victim's early statement F, the investigation record No. 74), the victim's intelligent index is relatively higher than 30.09 with social index 54, and the victim's concept of number, such as resident registration number, the defendant's handphone number, and the date, is accurately known.