The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The summary of the facts charged was around 04:00 on November 26, 2012, the Defendant: (a) from around 21:00 the previous 21:00 days before the Defendant’s residence, the Defendant used the victim D (the age of 39) who had drinking together from around 21:0 to around 39 on the day before the Defendant’s residence, in a state of difficulty to resist; (b) taken advantage of the victim’s chest under the influence of alcohol; and (c) exempted the victim’s lower part of the lower part of the lower part of the Defendant’s drinking

2. The defendant and his defense counsel did not have sexual intercourse by taking advantage of the victim's state of impossibility to resist, and there was no intention to commit such crime against the defendant.

3. Determination

A. Article 299 of the Criminal Act provides that a person who has sexual intercourse with another person by taking advantage of his/her mental or physical disability or non-fluence to resist shall be punished as committing rape under Article 297

In this context, the state of impossibility to resist refers to a case where psychological or physical resistance is absolutely impossible or considerably difficult due to the reason other than defect in accordance with Article 297 of the Criminal Code.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2009Do2001 Decided April 23, 2009, etc.). In a criminal trial, the finding of guilt ought to be based on evidence of probative value, to the extent that it is unlikely for a judge to make reasonable doubt that the facts charged are true, to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt. If there is no such evidence, the suspicion that the Defendant is guilty is suspected.

Even if there is no choice but to judge the interests of the defendant.

B. (See, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Do8965, Feb. 10, 2006).

According to the evidence examined by this court, the victim seems to have been in a state that he/she was unable to properly memory his/her work on which he/she was on the day.

However, in light of the following circumstances admitted by the above evidence, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is insufficient or substantially difficult for the victim to resist himself/herself in the event of sexual intercourse due to the sobandon.