However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

On May 2015, the Defendant: (a) accessed the victim D (hereinafter “C”) who became aware of a female-only mobile phone-only mobile phone-type display case; (b) made a mutual dynamic relationship with the victim as if he was a female; (c) made a single-name “SM display” to which the other party agreed to comply with the request; and (d) consented by the victim; (c) received a transmission of the victim’s personal body and self-defensive behavior photographs, and its video, etc. with the victim’s consent through the victim’s Kakao Stockholm, a car-only mobile phone-type display case.

1. On May 7, 2015, the Defendant forced the Defendant to suspend the MF display at the Defendant’s residence located in Eunpyeong-gu Seoul E-B lending No. 102 on May 7, 2015 and not send a body photo any longer.

There is no choice but to say that the victim's refusal "Woman's intimidation was known to him."

D. The Defendant sent a Kakao Stockholm message to the victim who was in custody with the victim’s consent, and then sent it to the victim’s body photograph and self-definite image on the Internet at around 12:41 on the same day by threatening the victim who was in custody with the victim’s personal body photograph and self-definite image, and by threatening the victim to take a image of the Kakao Stockholm message to the victim who was sexually exposed to the sex.

Accordingly, the defendant, by threatening the victim, caused the victim to take a dynamic image on his own, and transmit the image, so that the victim does not have any obligation.

2. On July 29, 2015, the Defendant attempted to compel the Defendant sent a message demanding the Victim’s body photograph by means of mobile phone Kakao Stockholm case at the Defendant’s residence indicated in paragraph (1) around 00:08, and the victim rejected this.