The judgment of the court below (including the portion not guilty) shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

except that this judgment.

The Defendant was unaware of the gist of the grounds for appeal by the Defendant at the time of committing the instant crime, and the Defendant did not know that the victim was a person with a disability of Grade 6.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of violating the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Indecent Acts by force against persons with disabilities) is erroneous and adversely affected by

The punishment sentenced by the court below (three years of imprisonment, and 80 hours of completion of sexual assault treatment programs) is too unreasonable.

The public prosecutor's mistake (not guilty part of the reason) found that the defendant committed an indecent act by deceiving the victim's chest, etc., and confirmed that there is no person to help the victim visit when the victim requested help, and that the defendant "the victim will do so," and "the victim will do so," and "the victim will do so," and "the victim will do so, and the victim will start sexual intercourse with the intent of sexual intercourse."

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant on the grounds of the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Rape with Persons with Disabilities) and the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Rape with Residence), which are the primary charges of this case

The punishment sentenced by the court below is too uneasible and unfair.

Judgment

As to the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of the facts, the lower court also argued to the same effect as the grounds for appeal in this part, and the lower court, that is,, the Defendant, as a resident living in the same Dong Dong Dongdong as the victim, opened the victim’s house gate and the entrance and intrudes into the victim’s room without any specific network, and the victim again referred to as “here-child” the Defendant as “here-child.” The victim did not properly resist the Defendant’s crime due to physical disability and vertebrate, etc., and the Defendant did not resist the Defendant on the other hand.