The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

However, for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The victim’s statement that corresponds to the facts charged in this case of mistake of facts is less reliable in light of the empirical rule, etc.

The victim has given implied consent under the so-called blackout, or has sexual intercourse with the defendant according to sexual impulses caused by drinking, and there was no fact that the defendant has made quasi-rape by taking advantage of the victim's state of resisting.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (two years of imprisonment and forty hours of completion of sexual assault treatment programs) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated, the lower court determined that the Defendant could have recognized the fact of quasi-rapeing three times by taking advantage of the victim’s state of failing to resist as stated in the instant facts charged.

① Each statement in the victim’s investigative agency and court of the court below is consistent with the details of damage, the situation at the time of the case, the circumstances before and after the damage, and the main parts of the contents thereof, and there is no other circumstance inconsistent with the statement, and thus, its credibility is recognized.

② In light of the victim’s appearance of CCTV images taken by the Defendant and the victim at the time of the instant crime, the victim appears to have been unable to make any judgment by drinking at the time of the instant crime, and the Defendant seems to have sufficiently known such facts.

③ The Defendant also asserted to the effect that the victim did not lose his mind at the time of sexual intercourse with the Defendant. However, considering the victim’s appearance of CCTV images, the circumstances in which the Defendant laund the victim’s clothes, and the details of the statement regarding the response of the victim during the Defendant’s sexual intercourse, the victim’s mind at the time of entering the room is the same.