The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The summary of the facts charged was known through C to the victim D (V, 19 years of age) and on the Internet, and the victim is a person with a intellectual disability of class 2 of the intellectual disability index 48.

On August 30, 2016, at around 12:00, the Defendant sent the victim to F, who was in Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government E, and got F, followed by holding the victim's hand, brought the victim's hand to the part of the Defendant's sexual flag by holding the victim's hand, knife the victim's hand, knife the victim's hand, knife the victim's entrance, knife the victim's knife, and knife the victim's knife, knife the victim's home.

The defendant, at around 14:45 on the same day, went off all his clothes and her clothes at the dwelling of the defendant, who was living in Seoyang-gu G building B 101, Seoyang-gu, Seoyang-gu, Seoyang-gu, G, 101, and held that he does not want to do so.

As a result, the victim was exempted from the victim's seat directly, was removed from the victim's panty, and was placed on the victim's body, and was sexual intercourse once with the victim's body.

Accordingly, the defendant has sexual intercourse with the victim who has a mental disability by force.

2. The defendant did not recognize that the victim had a mental disability at the time of sexual intercourse with the victim.

There was no fact of exercising the victim's power, and sexual intercourse was established under the agreement.

3. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court as to whether the defendant recognized the victim's mental disability or not, D is found to have undergone the diagnosis of "serious disability" in Intelligent Index (I Q) 48 (the state that falls under class 2 of the intellectual disability but does not register the intellectual disability), and D is somewhat blind at the defendant Indian investigative agency.

I think that it was

However, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone in full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by this court is sufficient to say that the defendant has a mental disability to the victim.