The defendant is innocent. The summary of this judgment shall be notified publicly.

1. From 2016 to 2016, the Defendant came to know of the complainant B (nive, false, and 20) while running online games.

At around 08:00 on June 24, 2018, the Defendant found the house of the complainant in Incheon Jung-gu, Incheon, along with his friendship C, under the pretext of house, and drink drinking at the room, and she was placed on his/her side by putting the arms of the complainant who is intending to be laid on the inside and outside of the room by the complainant with his/her her friendly appearance C, and then placed them on his/her side. At the same time, the under the influence of alcohol exceeded the name of the complainant, who was locked off from the name of the complainant, who was locked, and was fright off with his/her chest’s will and clothes, and sexual intercourse once with the complainant.

Accordingly, the defendant has sexual intercourse with the complainant by taking advantage of the complainant's failure to resist.

2. The gist of the Defendant and his defense counsel’s assertion was that the complainant was unable to resist at the time of having sexual intercourse with the complainant, and thus there was no intention to quasi-rape.

3. Determination

A. The burden of proving the facts charged in a criminal trial of the relevant legal doctrine is to be borne by the prosecutor, and the conviction is to be based on the evidence of probative value, which makes the judge feel true enough to have no reasonable doubt. Therefore, if there is no such evidence, the doubt of guilt against the Defendant even if there is no such evidence.

Even if there is no choice but to judge the interests of the defendant.

(Supreme Court Decision 2014Do8722 Decided August 27, 2015). 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 failing to resist shall be punished as the crime of rape or indecent act under Articles 297 and 298 of the Criminal Act.

Here, the state of impossibility to resist refers to a case in which psychological or physical resistance is absolutely impossible or considerably difficult due to the reason other than the defect in accordance with Articles 297 and 298 of the Criminal Code.

Supreme Court on June 28, 2012