The defendant is innocent.

1. The summary of the facts charged was around 22:00 on July 10, 2013, the Defendant: (a) had the victim E (n, 17 years of age) and drinking-in at the Sungnam-si Dhop located in Sungnam-si C, and (b) had the victim E (n, 17 years of age); (c) around 01:30 on July 11, 2013, the Defendant took the victim, who was under the influence of alcohol and was unable to properly hold the victim’s body, into “G” joints located in the Regu, the Regu, the Si, Sungnam-si, and 206, exceeded the victim’s panty, and had sexual intercourse once.

Accordingly, the defendant has sexual intercourse with the victim by taking advantage of the victim's mental or physical state of difficulty.

2. The facts charged in the instant case are those applicable to a person who commits a crime under Article 298 of the Criminal Act against a child or juvenile pursuant to Article 7(4) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse.

Article 299 of the Criminal Act provides that a person who has sexual intercourse by taking advantage of a person's mental or physical condition to resist or refuse shall be punished as the crime of rape under Article 297 of the Criminal Act. In light of the fact that this crime is protected by the protection of sexual self-determination right to sexual self-determination, and Article 302 of the Criminal Act separately provides for the punishment of a person who has sexual intercourse with a minor or a person with mental or physical disability by deceptive scheme or force against the minor or the person with mental or physical disability, the state of refusal to resist under Article 299 of the Criminal Act refers to the case where psychological or physical resistance is absolutely impossible or considerably difficult due to the reason other than mental or physical disorder in accordance with Article

(See Supreme Court Decision 98Do3257 delivered on May 26, 2000). In addition, the Defendant should have had the intention to the effect that the victim was unable to resist or was in a state of mental disorder.

The witness E, a victim, did not memory the defendant in this law and in investigative agencies, but she was moving a cab from the head of the hof house to the hold, and she did not memory, and she went beyond the part of Mour.