The judgment of the court below is reversed.

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

except that, for three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

The Defendant had sexual intercourse with the victim on the date and time stated in the instant facts charged, but at the time, the victim was not under the influence of alcohol, and was sexual intercourse under the agreement with the victim.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty on the facts charged of this case on the premise that the victim was not guilty or unable to resist is erroneous and misunderstanding legal principles.

In full view of the following: (a) the Defendant believed that there was an agreement on the sexual relationship with the victim on the sexual intercourse without recognizing that the victim was either defective or unable to resist; (b) the Defendant reported himself/herself to the police by taking into account the state of the victim who did not have any response to the sexual intercourse; (c) the victim was voluntarily agreed with the victim and did not want punishment against the Defendant; and (d) the Defendant did not have any criminal record exceeding the fine and did not have any power of the same kind; and (b) the lower court’s imprisonment (a) imprisonment for a sexual assault treatment program program program program program program program program program program program program program program program program program program program program program program program program program program program program program program program

Judgment

The Defendant admitted all the facts charged in the instant case at the lower court, but denied the facts charged by asserting as the grounds for appeal, in the first instance.

In the lower court, it is examined whether the Defendant was guilty of the facts charged of this case on the basis of credibility of confession made by the Defendant in the lower court.

The defendant's confession in the court of first instance is not sufficient to conclude that the probative value or credibility of the confession is doubtful solely on the grounds that the confession in the court of appeal differs from the statement in the court of appeal. In determining the credibility of the confession, the contents of the confession are objectively rational, what is the motive or reason for the confession, and what is the motive or reason for the confession.