A. In light of the following circumstances, the victim’s implied consent was given at the time when the defendant photographs the victim’s body, and the victim’s statement to the effect that the defendant affixed a photograph of the victim is not credibility.

① The Defendant and the victim continued to maintain an internal relationship, and have taken video images and photographs with a higher level than the instant pictures on several occasions with implied consent.

In light of such relationship between the defendant and the victim, the defendant taken the form of the victim who salking against the victim's will.

It is difficult to see it.

② In full view of the victim’s appearance and circumstances at the time of the instant pictures, the victim was clearly aware of the fact that he/she is taking his/her own image and, however, did not raise any objection.

(3) In addition, the victim’s statement may not be fully reliable, such as making a statement that the victim was a sexual image even though the images of a Intimidation message sent to the Defendant were sexually related.

B. The punishment of the lower court (an amount of KRW 4 million and an order to complete a 40 million) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) The lower court also asserted the same purport as the grounds for appeal, and the lower court, based on its stated reasoning, acknowledged that the Defendant, without the consent of the victim, has credibility in the victim’s testimony, and that the Defendant taken pictures without the victim’s consent.

The decision was determined.

2) In light of the following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, the Defendant taken photographs of the victim.

The testimony to the effect that “the defendant has credibility in the victim’s testimony, and sufficiently recognizes the fact that the defendant taken the victim’s body against the victim’s will.