All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence of the lower court (one year of imprisonment) against the Defendant (unfair sentencing) is too unreasonable.

B. As to the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Rape with a disabled person), a prosecutor 1 recognizes that the defendant has raped the victim F by assault and intimidation as described in the facts charged, and as to the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (violation with a disability), the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Indecent Act with a disability), the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Indecent Act with a disability), and the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (rape with a disabled person), the defendant acknowledged that the above victim has sexual intercourse with or committed indecent act by using the victim's mental disability or difficult resistance as described in the facts charged, the

2) The lower court’s sentence against an unfair defendant in sentencing is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination of the Prosecutor’s misunderstanding of the facts and misapprehension of the legal doctrine

A. The lower court acknowledged the following facts based on the evidence adopted and examined by the lower court.

1) The Defendant and F related to the first meta of the Defendant and F) send the Defendant’s page to F through the cellular phone-type display “G”

At the first time, the defendant started to the above "D" main points operated by the defendant.

The Defendant first met F with F on 2015, and at the point of the “D”, the Defendant had a sexual intercourse with D and had a sexual intercourse in U music.

F. F. F. F. F. F. at the first met around August 2015 and at the point of “D”

statement.

B) In the first statement of the police, F did not make a statement on the first day on which the Defendant first met with the Defendant. In the second statement, F was made by the Defendant that the video recording CCTV was not made due to the fact that the first time was drinking, and that the video recording CCTV was not made.