The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts and legal principles, the court below judged the degree of disability of the victim without undergoing an examination of evidence, such as hearing the victim's legal statement or recycling video CDs. The court below erred by misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles, which judged that mental disorders of the victim are not likely to interfere with the exercise of sexual decision-making power without undergoing sufficient examination.

B. The sentence that the lower court sentenced to the Defendant and the person who requested the attachment order (hereinafter “Defendant”) (two years of suspended sentence in October, and forty hours of the order to attend a course) is too unfasible and unfair.

2. Determination on the defendant's case

A. Determination 1 on the assertion of misunderstanding of facts and legal principles 1) Article 6(3) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes that punishs a person with a physical or mental disability in the event of an indecent act by force against another person with a physical or mental disability is a legal interest to protect his/her right to sexual self-determination of sexual crimes, so even if the injured person is a disabled person with a mental disability who has received a mental disability disability, it shall be proven that the injured person has a mental disorder to the extent that he/she is not able to exercise his/her right to make a sexual self-determination in addition to such disability (see Supreme Court Decision 2012Do12714, Apr. 11, 2013). 2) The lower court’s judgment and the trial court’s judgment were duly adopted and investigated, based on the following circumstances, the evidence submitted by a prosecutor alone proves that the injured person

It is insufficient to view it, and there is no other evidence to prove it.

We affirm this part of the judgment of the court below as just.

This part of the Prosecutor's argument is rejected.

On March 8, 2017, the victim completed the registration of the disabled after being judged at Grade III mental disorders (Evidence No. 23, 146, 147 of the evidence record). The victim shall be returned from time to time due to the early illness.