A. In light of the fact-misunderstanding and legal principles, the contents of telephone communications and text messages written in the facts charged by the Defendant sent to the victim (hereinafter “the instant text messages, etc.”) are nothing more than the Defendant’s sexual humiliation or aversion in the process of dialogueing the victim with the text messages, or it is only the answer during the process of exchanging conversations with the victim about sexual intercourse with the victim, not the Defendant’s sexual desire, but rather the Defendant’s expression in excess that the conversation was sent.

However, the lower court found the Defendant guilty on the facts charged of this case. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine or misunderstanding of facts.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (2 million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the following circumstances, as to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts and legal principles, the court below duly adopted and examined the following circumstances, it is sufficiently recognized that all the text messages, etc. sent by the defendant to the victim sent to the victim for the purpose of inducing or meeting his sexual humiliation and thus causing sexual humiliation or aversion. Thus, the court below's determination that the defendant was guilty of the facts charged in this case is just and acceptable, and there is no error of misunderstanding of the facts or misunderstanding of the legal principles pointed out by the defendant.

1) The instant text messages, etc. contain common words or abusives that cause sexual acts, and, when receiving such text messages, would naturally cause sexual humiliation or aversion to ordinary people.

2) Even if the instant text messages, etc. were to have a conversation with the Defendant.