1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Defendant filed a complaint with the Plaintiff on October 25, 2010, stating that “Plaintiff A filed an indecent act with the Defendant’s father, who is of the mental retardation disorder 1, known to the usual sense within the F container located in Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, and whose father and wife’s husband were married with the married couple, who was seated next to the married, only several times in part of G’s distribution and negative part, and who committed the indecent act.”

B. The Seo-gu District Prosecutor’s Office of the Daejeon District Prosecutors’ Office indicted Plaintiff A of a penalty of KRW 5 million by violating the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (rape-rape, etc. against the disabled). Plaintiff A of this case filed a request for formal trial in objection thereto.

On June 1, 2012, the Seogu District Court found the Plaintiff guilty of charges and sentenced a fine of KRW 5 million.

On May 20, 201, when the trial of the first instance was in progress, the Defendant: “Defendant A, in October of the last year, made the Defendant’s father and son and son with a disability G living together with the Defendant’s father and her mother as a sexual scarcity in the aftermath of the closed school, was present at the scene at H, who was subject to a fine in the prosecution as a crime of quasi-rape for the disabled, and was subject to the charge of quasi-rape for the disabled at the prosecution, but the Defendant completely denied the facts of the crime. Some of the petitioners who are residents of the same village, who were residents of Korea, were able to raise awareness of the disabled. While the Plaintiff A was unable to abuse the awareness of the disabled, I tried to protect the truth of the instant case.” The Defendant prepared a authentic letter to the effect that he is a intellectual disabled person, received his signature from 20 residents, including village I, and submitted it to the court.

C. On January 23, 2013, Plaintiff A appealed in the first instance judgment, and the Daejeon District Court rendered a judgment of innocence against Plaintiff A on the following grounds:

The Prosecutor appeals against Daejeon District Court 2012No1194. However, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal on April 25, 2013, which became final and conclusive not guilty.

The direct evidence of the facts charged in this case is the victim G's investigation agency and each of the statements at the court below, which are the smaller part of the victim G.

solely;