The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (in fact-finding or misunderstanding of legal principles) cannot be deemed to have been in the state of failing to resist, under the influence of alcohol at the time of the instant case, the victim did not have any potential sexual contact with the victim, and the Defendant was also aware that the victim was in a state of shouldering while sexual contact was committed.

On the other hand, the statement made by the victim that the victim was divingd at the time of the commencement of sexual contact with the victim by the victim at the time of the victim's sexual contact with the victim, and that the defendant perceived that the victim was diving while leading to such sexual contact with the victim, is not consistent with the victim's visible behavior, sexual contact behavior, and objective data because it is not consistent or consistent with the victim's sexual contact with the victim during the victim's sexual contact with the victim.

Considering these circumstances, the victim cannot be deemed to have sufficiently proven that there was no reasonable doubt as to the fact that the victim was in the state of mental or physical disability at the time of sexual intercourse with the Defendant, and that the Defendant was aware of the status of the victim and intended to use it.

Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of having sexual intercourse with the victim by taking advantage of the victim’s condition where the Defendant was in a state of mental or physical disability or impossibility to resist. In so doing, it erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine or misconception of facts.

2. Determination on the grounds for appeal

A. The crime of quasi-rape under the relevant legal doctrine is established by having sexual intercourse with a person’s mental or physical condition, taking advantage of the person’s mental or physical condition.