The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years and six months.

Sexual assault, 40 hours against the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Considering the circumstances leading up to the Defendant’s committing the instant crime, the lower court’s imprisonment (two years and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. In light of the fact that the prosecutor Defendant, who is merely a 13-year old intellectual disability victim, has sexual intercourse with the victim of the second degree of intellectual disability, the lower court’s sentence is too unhued and unreasonable

2. Judgment ex officio as to the primary facts charged

A. The summary of the facts charged in this part of the facts charged is that the Defendant, who was a child or juvenile of class 2 with intellectual disability who became aware of through hosting at the Internet game site, was engaged in as if he/she was a high school student of the name and status of the Defendant and as he/she was "D," and that he/she would be engaged in smartphones and sports against the victim."

On August 3, 2012, the Defendant: (a) intending to become the victim in the play park located in Bupyeong-dong, Nowon-gu, Seoul; and (b) was going to the Seoul metropolitan area along with the victim; (c) around 01:00 on August 4, 201, the Defendant had sexual intercourse with the disabled child or juvenile, who had no ability to discern things or make decisions due to mental disorder, by moving the victim to the room where the victim silentd, and by inserting the Defendant’s sexual organ into the part of the sound of the victim; (d) around 01:00 on August 4, 2012, the Defendant had sexual intercourse with the disabled child or juvenile, who had no capacity to discern things or make decisions with the victim.

B. The lower court found the Defendant guilty on the ground that it is reasonable to view the Defendant as aware of the victim’s intellectual disability level, in full view of the content of the victim’s psychological evaluation report prepared by the I, the content of the victim’s statement, the victim’s attitude expressed in the video CD, the Defendant’s investigative agency’s statement, and the circumstances in which the Defendant became aware of the victim’s intellectual disability level.

C. The judgment of the court of the first instance (1) is the basis for judgment.