2. The lower court rendered a not guilty verdict on the facts charged in this case on the grounds as indicated in its reasoning. In other words, the Defendant, based on the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, was aware of the following circumstances, i.e., the victim’s face while posting the victim’s photograph on the website, and the victim’s personal information was not indicated at all, and thus, the Defendant could not be identified. As such, the Defendant’s social assessment or value differs depending on whether he/she was the victim’s body characteristics or the difference with other people where he/she is not his/her head.

In light of the fact that it is difficult to see it, the judgment of the court below is just, and there is an error of law by misunderstanding the facts alleged by the prosecutor or misunderstanding the legal principles.

It is not recognized.

3. The appeal by the prosecutor of the conclusion is without merit, and it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.