All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1 was unaware of the fact that the Defendant had a intellectual disability for the victim. Therefore, the lower court, which recognized an indecent act by force on the disabled, erred by misapprehending the facts. 2) The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In the lower court’s determination of the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts, the Defendant made the same assertion as the grounds for appeal in this part, and the lower court rejected the Defendant’s assertion in detail, with the title “determination of the Defendant and his defense counsel’s assertion” stated in the said judgment.

The above judgment of the court below and the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below are as follows: ① The contents of the Clinical Test specialist I's psychological evaluation report are as follows: ① The victim's recognition function is 50 of the entire intelligence, language intelligence 52, and intelligence 59 of the same preparation. The ability to form a language concept is delayed, and the obsiveness such as verbal understanding and speech ability is very low. It seems that simple obsiveness of self-esteem is considerably poor, and the basic common sense and knowledge level are evaluated as the overall intellectual disability level, and the basic learning is not achieved. ② The defendant was aware that the victim's intelligence index was lower at the investigative agency, and the victim's mental body is registered. The victim's body is not sufficient to have the victim's normal body, and the victim's body is not sufficient to have the victim's ability to build.