The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant alleged a misunderstanding of facts was only sexual intercourse under the agreement with the victim, and did not have a forced sexual intercourse by assault and threat.

The judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous.

B. The lower court’s imprisonment (seven years of imprisonment, etc.) on the ground of unfair sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The assault and threat necessary for the establishment of a determination of mistake of facts should be such that it would make it impossible or considerably difficult for the victim to resist against the victim.

“The degree of assault and intimidation to make it impossible or considerably difficult to resist the victim” should be determined based on the specific circumstances in which the victim was faced at the time of assault and threat, including not only the content and degree of assault and threat, but also the developments leading up to exercising force, the relationship with the victim, and the circumstances at the time of and after the act.

From an ex post facto perspective, the victim could escape from the scene of crime.

The perpetrator’s assault and threat did not reach the extent of making it considerably difficult for the perpetrator to resist (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2006Do5979, Jan. 25, 2007; 2017Do21249, Feb. 28, 2018) solely on the ground that the perpetrator did not resist due to his or her force. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by evidence duly adopted and investigated at the lower court and the trial, it should be deemed that the Defendant had sexual intercourse with the Defendant, to the extent that it is impossible or considerably difficult for the victim to resist.

In light of the progress of the instant case, even if there was no direct intimidation at the time of sexual intercourse, there is a proximate causal relationship between the defendant's intimidation and sexual intercourse prior to and after sexual intercourse.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty is just, and the defendant's assertion is without merit.

1. The defendant makes a statement.