The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although there is a fact that the Defendant, as stated in the judgment of the court below, has sexual intercourse with the victim as stated in paragraphs (3) and (1), there is no fact that he had sexual intercourse as stated in paragraphs (1) and (2), and the sex relationship was obtained with the consent of the victim by gathering the fact of the victim’s disability, and it does not use the victim’s non-performance status due to the mental disorder.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (seven years of imprisonment) is excessively unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts, the lower court determined that ① the victim stated very detailed matters difficult to express without any direct experience from the police with regard to the sexual relationship under Articles 1 and 2 of the facts of the crime as indicated in the lower judgment; ② the victim did not appear to have any circumstance different from the motive in which the victim reported the crime of this case; ② the analysis expert of child sexual assault case, which analyzed the victim’s statement, expressed that the victim’s statement is highly reliable; ③ the victim is a disabled person of Grade 3 of intellectual disability; ③ the victim was a disabled person of Grade 47 of the total intelligence index; the social maturity index was 47 years old; the social maturity index was 6 months old; the social maturity was 47 years old; the social maturity was insufficient; ② the victim could not take sanitary care alone; ② the victim’s emotional relationship was incomplete; ⑤ the victim’s emotional relationship was 8 years old; and ④ the victim could have been actively expressed with the Defendant’s guardian’s right to express his/her opinion before and after the examination.