The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four years.

For a period of five years, information about the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Fact misunderstanding 1) The Defendant was only sexual intercourse under an agreement with the victim and did not commit rape by assaulting or threatening the victim.

2) The Defendant did not commit an indecent act against the victim by means of cutting the victim’s conspiracy.

3) The injury of the victim of the crime resulting from rape in the instant case was caused by the victim’s cerebral blood, and was related to the person with the said crime.

It is difficult to see it.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (seven years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination on the defendant's case

A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts, 1) In light of the content of marriage and family life guaranteed by the Constitution, the changes in perception of sexual assault at home, the structure of the Criminal Act and its amendment process, the legal protection of the victim of the crime of rape, and the content of the husband’s duty to live together, etc., the “child”, which is the object of the crime of rape as stipulated under Article 297 of the Criminal Act, includes the legal wife, and even if the marital relationship is substantially maintained as well as the failure of the marital relationship, the husband shall be deemed to establish the crime of rape in the event of assault or intimidation to make it impossible or considerably difficult for the husband to resist or make it difficult for him/her to resist.

However, whether assault or intimidation against her husband’s wife made it impossible or considerably difficult to make a victim’s resistance, or on the premise that the State’s intervention in sexual life between the husband and wife ought to be restricted to the maximum extent from the perspective of the maintenance of the family. Determination should be made carefully by taking into account all the circumstances, such as (i) the content and degree of the assault or intimidation, whether the contents and degree of the assault or intimidation essentially infringed upon the wife’s sexual self-determination right; (ii) the circumstances in which her husband exercised tangible power; (iii) how her husband was married; (iv) the form of marital life; (v) the husband’s ordinary character and behavior; and (v) the situation at the time of sexual intercourse and the subsequent situation (Supreme Court Decision 2012Do