The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence presented by the prosecutor as to the gist of the grounds for appeal, D at the time of the instant case was in the state of lacking ability to discern things or make decisions due to mental disability, and even though the Defendant was aware of this fact and sufficiently recognized that D had sexual intercourse twice, the lower court acquitted all of the facts charged in the instant case. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case became aware of D(13 years old) as a child or juvenile with a disability of Grade 3 in intellectual disability through “C” around March 2015, the Defendant had been aware of the fact that D had a lack of intellectual ability than the general public and had sexual intercourse with D through dialogue.

On March 12, 2015, the Defendant: (a) sought in the F coffee shop located in Namyang-si, Namyang-si; (b) sought D from around 11:00 to around 15:0 on March 12, 2015; (c) taken D from around 15:0 to around 15:00 to around 30, 2015 to the guest room on the second floor of the Hcom in Gwangjin-gu, Seoul; (d) took off D’s clothes from around 1, 200 to 1,00; and (d) had sexual intercourse with D in the same manner at the same time at the same time.

As a result, the Defendant had sexual intercourse with D, who is a child or juvenile under 13 years of age or older and lacks the ability to discern things or make decisions due to mental disorder.

B. The lower court determined that: (a) comprehensively admitted the evidence adopted by the lower court; (b) i.e., (c) the Defendant dialogueed via the instant Messenger for approximately 2-3 days before meeting with D; and (c) the Defendant and D’s dialogue directly perceived that D’s intellectual impairment was directly recognized.

The contents that can be seen do not appear, and ② the Defendant divided a considerable number of conversationss with D or Skins at the time of conversation through the instant Messen. On March 11, 2015, the Defendant wanted to d to remove the Messen defect immediately.