The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Seized evidence 7 shall be confiscated.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant (1) misunderstanding of facts (the fact of an indecent act against a person with a mental disability) committed sexual traffic on the day of the instant case, the Defendant and D were only involved in sexual traffic, and the phiphone medication did not go against D’s will. Thus, the Defendant did not commit an indecent act against D by force.

(2) The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one year and six months of imprisonment and 40 hours of order to complete a sexual assault treatment program) is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts

A. On March 11, 2018, from around 01:35 to 03:50 on the same day, the Defendant provided a philopon to the victim D within the luminous hotel C, with a view to committing an indecent act against the victim by using the circumstance that the victim, who was in a state where the victim’s ability to discern things or make decisions due to drugs, does not properly resist or refuse to resist, and the victim, who was making shower in the toilet, did not resist or refuse to resist, made the victim Dal with his sexual organ as soon as possible, let the victim Dal with the shower, return the victim back to the victim’sus in order to put the victim’s sexual organ into the victim’s resistance, putting the finger back into the victim’s anus, separating the hick of the shower C, sticking the hick into the victim’s anus, and injecting it into the victim’s water.

Accordingly, the defendant committed an indecent act by force on a person with a weak disability who has the ability to discern things or make decisions due to drugs.

B. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the above facts charged after compiling the evidence as indicated in its judgment.

C. Comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances that can be recognized based on the records of the judgment at the trial, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to recognize the fact that the defendant committed an indecent act against a person with mental disability by force

① At the court of the first instance, D was the third met of the Defendant on the day of the instant case, and decided to engage in sexual traffic.