Defendant

In addition, the appeal by the person who requested the attachment order is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant and the person against whom the attachment order was requested (hereinafter “Defendant”) did not commit an indecent act against the victim, and did not know that the victim was a intellectually disabled person.

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

2. Determination

A. The lower court also asserted the same purport as the grounds for appeal in this part, and the lower court rejected the Defendant’s allegation that the Defendant could be convicted of the facts charged in this case by explaining detailed circumstances in the item of “determination on the Defendant and the defense counsel’s assertion”.

In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below, the above judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there is no error of law of misunderstanding of facts as alleged by the defendant.

1. The victim got a sound to the investigative agency: “I am bad I am to wait for the bus, but I am to the market. I am to am to am to am to am to am to am to am to am to am to am to am to am to am to am to am to am to am to am to am to am to am to am to am to am to am to am to am to am to am to am to am to am?” “I am to am to am to am to am to am to am to am to am to am to am to am to am to am to am to am to am to am to am to am to am to am to am to am

agency.

(e) the statement that it was a handy site;

“,” and “Irried Dried Dried Dried Dried Dried

"............. "........... was flicker's hand she had her clothes...

13 14 11

“I”, “I’t speak, I’t continue to do so

“A person’s knowledge and outline”

”, “하지 말라고 하니까 멈췄어요

"" and "Isopia will be changed."