성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(카메라등이용촬영)
The judgment below
The guilty portion shall be reversed.
The sentence of sentence shall be suspended for the defendant.
The judgment of the court below is delivered.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged as to the photographing of a woman's chest around July 2013, since the photograph taken by the defendant could not cause sexual humiliation or shame due to the general wind of the cargo transport unit, it was erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles or in the misapprehension of legal principles, and it does not so.
Even if the court below's punishment (including fine of KRW 500,00 and completion of sexual assault treatment program 16 hours) is too unreasonable.
B. The lower court found the Defendant not guilty of each photographing on July 2013, 2013, of the instant facts charged, on the ground that the Defendant taken a certain part of a female woman’s body and that it is sufficient to cause sexual humiliation or shame, and thus, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine or misapprehending the legal doctrine, and that the sentence of the lower judgment is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. (1) According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below regarding the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, the photograph taken by the defendant around July 2013 by the defendant is not the body of the victim, but the body of the victim, and the body of the person who may cause sexual humiliation or sense of shame, and the photograph taken by the defendant around July 2013 is the body of the victim, and it can be recognized that the body of the victim was taken by the chest. According to the above facts of recognition, it is reasonable to view the above photograph as a photograph taken by the victim of sexual humiliation or sense of shame. Thus, this part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.
(2) The lower court’s judgment on the Prosecutor’s assertion that each of the instant facts charged does not appear to have been taken by emphasizing the specific parts of a woman’s body, but does not have any physical exposure.
Even if a certain part is not taken, the whole part is taken, but the part is taken, and a natural attitude appearing in the daily life is taken.