The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, the defendant exercised the force to suppress or make it considerably difficult to suppress the victim's resistance. Thus, the charge of rape against the defendant is guilty. However, the court below found the defendant not guilty on this part of the facts charged and recognized only the crime of sexual intercourse with a minor by force. Thus, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts and the legal principles of rape, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The lower court’s sentencing (one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution) is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Determination on the grounds for appeal

A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, the lower court found the Defendant not guilty of this part of the facts charged on the ground that it is difficult to see that the Defendant’s act alone proves that there was no reasonable doubt as to the fact that the exercise of force by the Defendant was impossible or considerably difficult to resist by the victim, and there was no other evidence to find the exercise of force by the Defendant constitutes an assault in the crime of rape, even though the Defendant expressed his intention of refusal by stating that the Defendant continued to be “Ma.” and her force was obstructed. In light of the circumstance where the Defendant exercised force, the relationship between the Defendant and the victim, and the circumstances before and after sexual intercourse, etc., the Defendant’s use of force, and there was no other evidence to support that the exercise of force by the Defendant constitutes an assault in the crime of rape.

Examining the reasoning of the judgment of the court below in comparison with the relevant legal principles and records, the fact-finding and judgment of the court below are justified, and it is erroneous by misapprehending the legal principles on assault and threat in the crime of rape as the prosecutor pointed out in the judgment of the court below.