The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

Provided, That the above punishment shall be imposed for three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts) is consistent and detailed from the investigative agency to the court of the court below as to the details of the damage, and in particular, the defendant has made a statement about the ungeneral circumstances, such as the fact that the defendant was living together, and the statement is credibility.

In addition, in light of the fact that the victim constantly refused the proposal again to the victim at the time of the occurrence of the case, even though the defendant continued to teach the victim again, the victim stored the Defendant’s conversation as “the mobile phone installment” in I, and the victim used the three-dimensional system preceding the case and used the exemption from the exemption, etc., the victim had an intention to engage in a sex relationship under the agreement with the defendant on the day of the case.

It does not seem that it does not appear.

The lower court, even if the victim expressed his intention not to want the sexual intercourse, believed that the victim’s statement that the Defendant led to the coercion of sexual intercourse with the victim by silenting the intent of refusal.

In light of all the circumstances, it is difficult to eliminate the possibility that the victim's statement about the degree, etc. of tangible power exercised by the defendant is not true or exaggerated.

Although the court of the court below stated that the part of the court below's decision on the ground that the victim's sexual intercourse should be excluded from the credibility of the victim's statement is also appropriate in that it is not reasonable to expect that the victim's sexual intercourse should first be determined in addition to the victim's damage.

shall not be deemed to exist.

On the other hand, the Defendant reversed the statement as to the background leading up to the reversal with the victim on the day of the instant case, and even if the reversed statement itself is hard to obtain, the statement is made.