However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date of the final judgment.

On 2018, the Defendant maintained the relationship between the Defendant and the Victim B (Y, 32 years of age at the time) and the Fashion meeting, and the relationship with the sexual intercourse was maintained.

1. From August 9, 2018 to the victim’s residence located in Suwon-gu CHousing D, Suwon-gu, Suwon-si, the Defendant took a photograph of the victim’s cell phone with the victim’s cell phone, which could cause sexual humiliation to the victim’s cell phone with the victim’s cell phone, by drinking alcohol together with the victim, and using the crebs that the victim was locked.

2. On January 12, 2019, the Defendant found the victim’s house at around 04:15, and arrested a flagrant offender in the crime of intrusion upon residence, and then transmitted two copies of the photographs taken under the condition that he was brought to the F District of the Gyeonggi-gu Police Station in Suwon-si E, Suwon-si, the Gyeonggi-si Police Station in Suwon-si, and sent two copies of the photographs taken under the condition that he was brought to the F District of the Gyeonggi-do Police Station in Suwon-gu, Suwon-si, the Defendant

In this respect, the defendant provided the photographs taken against the victim's will.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of the witness B;

1. The police seizure record and the list of seizure;

1. Investigation report (to attach a photograph of a photograph sent by a suspect to the male-child of the victim), and investigation report (the confirmation of possession of a cell phone at the time of the occurrence of the case);

1. In the case of the crime of Paragraph 1 of the judgment, the Defendant alleged that he/she obtained the victim’s consent and taken a photograph, but the victim stated in the investigative agency that “the victim has no consent to take the photograph before drinking. There is no absolute consent.” This court also stated that “the Defendant sent the above photograph to his/her male-child body. The Defendant was aware of the fact that he/she reported the original photograph which was put into storage at the time, and was at all not aware of the photograph at the time. At first, he/she did not take any opinion even if he/she did not take the photograph at the time.”