The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than three years and six months.

For a period of eight years, the information about the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. On December 13, 2015, the Defendant and the person who requested the attachment order (hereinafter “Defendant”) were forced to freely live in the place of residence of the Defendant and the person who requested the attachment order (hereinafter “Defendant”) according to his/her own needs and desire while the victim was already released.

The defendant did not attract the victim, and the victim did not have sexual intercourse even at the time of the defendant's home.

However, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine that found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2) On March 1, 2016, the victim had been living freely at the Defendant’s residence according to his/her own will while the victim had already been married to sexual intercourse.

The defendant did not attract the victim, and there was no purpose of sexual intercourse.

However, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine that found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

3) The victim of sexual abuse against a child determined the gender relationship on an equal footing with the Defendant and accordingly sexual intercourse.

At that time the victim did not lack the ability to exercise his/her right to sexual self-determination.

In addition, the defendant did not commit sexual assault or cruel acts against the victim.

However, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine that found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

4) A person who entices a child in violation of the Act on the Protection and Support of Missing Children, Etc. to leave from his/her custodian does not constitute a person without reporting under Article 17 of the Act on the Protection and Support of Missing Children, Etc. (hereinafter “Judicial Child Act”).

A person who has induced a child shall continue to control the fact.