The judgment below

The guilty portion shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for eight years.

Sexual assault, 80 hours against the defendant.

1. The lower court acquitted the Defendant on the charge of the violation of the Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and Protection of Victims, etc. (rape-rape in relation to relatives) on February 26, 2010 among the facts charged in the instant case, the lower court did not deem that it was proven to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt that the Defendant committed quasi-rape in relation to the victim on the above date.

The Defendant appealed from the judgment of the court below on the guilty portion, and the prosecutor appealed from the judgment of the court below on the grounds of unfair sentencing, and did not appeal on the acquittal portion, and the above acquittal portion was separately decided as it is.

Therefore, only the guilty portion of the judgment of the court below falls under the scope of this court's trial.

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) Since each of the facts charged in this case did not specify the date and time of the crime, causing substantial disadvantage to the defendant’s exercise of his/her right to defense, it constitutes a case where the indictment procedure is invalid in violation of the provisions of law.

B) The lower court found the Defendant guilty on the ground of the victim’s statement that there was no sexual intercourse or indecent act with the victim who was unable to resist. However, considering the victim’s statement that part of the victim’s statement does not fit the objective circumstances at the time of the crime, that the victim was sexual intercourse with the Defendant who was in the sexual intercourse with the Defendant who was in the sexual intercourse with the Defendant who was in the sexual intercourse with the sexual intercourse with the Defendant who was in the sexual intercourse with the Defendant who was in the sexual intercourse with the Defendant, but the victim’s mother was not in a position in a negative state despite his age, and that there was a possibility that the victim was made a false statement with the victim’s intent by taking account of the abnormal and abnormal motive for deceiving the Defendant, the victim’s statement, which is almost the only evidence as to paragraphs 1 through 7 of the instant facts charged, cannot be reliable).