The defendant shall be innocent.

1. On October 14:30, 2018, the Defendant committed an indecent act by taking advantage of the victim’s state of refusal to resist by taking advantage of the victim’s condition where recognition functions such as memory are deteriorated as the victim suffers from the her detailed personality dementia, as he/she suffers from the victim’s sexual dementia, etc. in a state where he/she is aware of his/her unknown whereabouts. The Defendant committed an indecent act by taking advantage of the victim’s state of refusal to resist.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The gist of the Defendant’s and his defense counsel’s assertion is that the Defendant had physical contact, such as the instant facts charged, under agreement with C.

At the time, C was not in the state of impossibility to resist, and the defendant was aware of C's state of impossibility to resist and did not commit an indecent act using such state.

B. Determination 1) Article 299 of the Criminal Act provides that a person who has sexual intercourse or indecent act by taking advantage of the person’s mental disorder or state of non-performance to resist shall be punished as the crime of rape or indecent act by compulsion under Articles 297 and 298 of the Criminal Act. Here, “the state of non-performance to resist” refers to cases where psychological or physical resistance is absolutely impossible or considerably difficult due to reasons other than the mental disorder under Articles 297 and 298 of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 98Do3257, May 26, 200). According to the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court, C(D) sent the bill to C(D) for a period of time after 2011, which shows symptoms, and eventually C(D) for a period of time prior to 2017, upon being diagnosed with C’s sexual intercourse on the day of hospitalization, and C(D) for which the Defendant was judged as having been subject to the C’s occupational relationship between C and C’s disease.