The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

At the time of committing the instant crime, the Defendant had weak ability to discern things or make decisions due to intellectual disability.

The punishment sentenced by the court below (3 years and six months of imprisonment, and 80 hours of completion of sexual assault treatment programs) is too unreasonable.

Judgment

According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below as to the argument of mental and physical weakness, the fact that the defendant is a disabled person of Grade II with intellectual visual disability is recognized, but on the other hand, the defendant returned to the apartment before and after the crime that is the defendant, and the defendant found in the victim's house and sold the pen.

"A person who commits a crime by entering the house after confirming that the victim is married," and the defendant asked the investigative agency to whether the victim is another person, and then brought the victim in the course of the crime.

In the room, the victim was exempted from the panty, and the panty was not put into the room, and thus the sexual relationship was established on the floor.

It seems that the victim was disabled due to a low-level accident, and the victim was disabled.

In full view of the following: (a) the fact that the Defendant stated relatively detailed statement, etc., (b) was in a state that the Defendant had the ability to discern things or make decisions due to intellectual disability at the time of committing the instant crime, and (c) the Defendant’s attitude, which was seen in the trial court, was insufficient to distinguish things or make decisions.

It does not seem that it does not appear.

Therefore, the defendant's ground of appeal disputing mental and physical weakness is without merit.

Examining the various sentencing conditions in the instant case regarding the unfair argument of sentencing, the fact that the Defendant appears to reflect wrongs while committing the crime, that the health status is not good for the persons with intellectual disability and visual disability, and that the Defendant’s family and family members appeal the preference.