The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months and suspension of qualifications for one year.

except that this judgment.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles ) The Defendant listen to the victim’s speech that the victim had been pregnant by entering into a forced relationship by male-child Gu, and the victim performed abortion by determining that the victim was pregnant by quasi-rape, and thus, it constitutes grounds for excluding illegality under the Mother and Child Health Act.

B) Although Liberia was discovered inside the victim's womb, the Defendant was fully aware of Liberia's number while removing Liberia, and the Defendant fulfilled his duty of care in relation to the removal of Liberia (the 2nd Liberian removal process seems to have been left in the womb.)

(B) In addition, even if there was a fluoralism that the Defendant did not remove Liberia, it is not likely that there was a fluoralism that absorptions the water when inserted into the Gluria Galian Galian Galian Galian Galian Galian Galian Galian Galian Galian Galian Galians (the injured party seems to have caused the fluoral colon by the side effects of the fluor and the fluoral drug

(2) The sentence imposed by the lower court on the grounds that the sentence of unfair sentencing (eight months of imprisonment and one year of suspension of qualifications) is too unreasonable.

B. The prosecutor (e.g., imprisonment for up to eight months, suspension of qualifications for one year) sentenced by the lower court is deemed to be too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination

A. Determination of the lower court on the Defendant’s assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles 1) The lower court determined that the Defendant’s assertion constitutes grounds for excluding illegality under the Mother and Child Health Act, i.e., the following circumstances acknowledged by evidence, i., ① even according to the Defendant’s statement, the victim’s request for abortion operation, and the victim’s request for contact with his/her current male-child relationship, and cannot cause any trouble.” The Defendant asked the victim “whether he/she is forced to be pregnant in an anti-voluntary situation in which he/she is not at the end of time,” and “.