The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. At the time of committing the instant crime, the Defendant was in a state of mental and physical disability with at least 2 Mauritius and at least 3 Mauritius.

B. The lower court’s sentence (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. On April 27, 2019, the day of the instant crime, the Defendant stated in the police that “the main volume of the Defendant is two times a week and one disease, and that he drank two diseases at the time of the instant crime,” the Defendant stated the background leading to the instant crime, the details of the instant crime, and the situation after the instant crime, as accurate memory, and the date and time of the instant crime are 6:0 p.m. at 15:0 p.m.

Therefore, on July 24, 2019, the victim with intellectual disability 2 appears to have been in the state of three soldiers in the face of a brupt, such as a person with a large face of alcohol at the police on July 24, 2019. The mere fact that the defendant made a statement that he/she had been under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime cannot be deemed to have reached the state of lacking the ability to discern things or make decisions, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this differently.

The defendant's argument of mental disability is not accepted.

(A) Article 20 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes provides that even if the defendant's arguments are recognized, it is difficult to reduce mental or physical disability that the defendant wishes.

If there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court on the assertion of unfair sentencing, or the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). The Defendant followed the victim of a intellectual disability 2, which was first viewed on the day of the instant crime, and committed an indecent act by force by force, following the victim’s her am and her part, which was sexually ill.

The victim seems to have suffered considerable mental impulse due to the crime of this case.

The Defendant committed the instant crime during the period of repeated crime.