The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant shall be innocent.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant thought that the victim was a minor who did not have any help but did not know that the victim had any mental disability. On the day of the instant case, the victim did not have a state of being unable to resist due to mental disability.

In addition, the defendant tried to establish a sexual relationship with the victim and let the victim go out of the victim's will and panty, but he reported that he is asked in the clothes of the victim and did not have an actual sexual relation.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in the instant case is erroneous by misapprehending the legal principles under Article 6 of the former Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (amended by Act No. 11088, Nov. 17, 2011; hereinafter the same), thereby affecting the conclusion

B. Even if the facts charged in the instant case on the grounds of unfair sentencing are found guilty, the lower court’s punishment (the imprisonment for three years, the suspension of execution for four years, the probation for three years, the order to attend a sexual assault treatment lecture for 120 hours, and the order to disclose for four years) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the defendant's misconception of facts or misapprehension of legal principles

A. On December 2010, the Defendant became aware of the victim D(Woo 14 years of age) with intellectual disability 3 who was hospitalized in the same ward and ward as C Hospital’s mental ward while hospitalized in the same hospital due to a traffic accident aftermath of the traffic accident.

On December 25, 2010, the Defendant: (a) 205, “Felher” located in Daegu-gu, Dong-gu, Daegu-gu, was off from the victim’s panty and panty; (b) kid the victim, kiding the body above her body, and did not reach 14 years of age; and (c) fell under class 3 of the intellectual disability and fell under class 3 of the intellectual disability, and was raped once by having sexual intercourse the victim in a state of non-performance due to mental disorder

B. The lower court’s judgment based on the circumstances indicated in its reasoning, which are acknowledged by comprehensively taking account of the adopted evidence.