The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds of appeal is as follows: ① The victim is 56 years of age and the social age is 9 years of age, and specifically, the communication ability is 5 years of age and work ability is merely 7 years of age and is merely an infant level; ② the victim is unable to respond properly to the question at an investigation agency; ② the victim is not allowed to answer the question at the investigation agency; ③ not only is it unclear whether the victim is married or not, but also there was no understanding of sexual relationship such as “I are male and female, and they are dead,” and ④ even if the victim was aware of the meaning of sexual relationship, it should be deemed that there was no sufficient resistance ability to resist sexual intercourse in light of the fact that the victim was aware of the sexual relationship, and thus, the victim was not guilty of the facts charged in this case, which affected the conclusion of the judgment by misapprehending the legal principles on the degree of disability of the victim or failing to resist.

2. The victim was unable to resist because he/she had a mental disorder sufficient to exercise his/her right to sexual self-determination.

In regard to the fact that the defendant has sexual intercourse with the victim, recognizing that the victim was unable to resist due to mental disorder, the lower court determined at the second or lower court’s judgment as follows, and determined that there is insufficient evidence to acknowledge it.

According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, ① the victim has been married for more than one year prior to the instant case, and the victim seems to have been clearly aware of the meaning of sexual intercourse, such as clarifying that the work he had between the defendant and the investigative agency is "sex relationship", and ②.