The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although there is a misunderstanding of facts that the defendant has a sexual relationship with the victim, this is made with the consent of the victim.

B. At the time of the instant case, the Defendant was in a state of mental disorder or mental disability under the influence of alcohol.

C. The lower court’s sentencing (one-year imprisonment, forty-hour order for sexual assault treatment programs, and four-hour order for disclosure and notification) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged by comprehensively taking account of all the evidence, such as the statement of the Defendant and the victim, following the confession of the Defendant. 2) Whether the Defendant forcedly had sexual intercourse (1) as to the statement of the relevant persons (i) according to the Defendant’s expression that the Defendant had sexual intercourse with the victim at the time of interrogation of the suspect, the Defendant’s statement: (i) there was “the fact that the Defendant had sexual intercourse with the victim at the time of interrogation of the suspect; and (ii) the Defendant replyed to the question asked about the meaning of the hot scarcity.”

Since then, the victim made a statement to the effect that he was aware that he had sexual intercourse with the victim's consent on the fat, and that he was only suspended by the victim's consent.

② In the second interrogation of the suspect, while maintaining the existing attitude of denying the suspicion with the victim, the victim, who had sexual intercourse with the victim, stated to the effect that the victim had sexual intercourse with the victim by giving force to the victim without stopping even though the victim said that the victim had sexual intercourse with the victim, and that the victim continued to have sexual intercourse. However, the victim’s statement at the end of the interrogation of the suspect was fully made at the time of the interrogation of the suspect, and acknowledged the facts of suspicion.

(3) The defendant is forced to be exempted from the clothes of the victim in the examination of suspect, and has sexual intercourse with him/her in spite of his/her refusal.