Accordingly, the defendant took photographs of another person's body, which could cause sexual humiliation or shame, using devices similar to the camera, against his will.

2. Determination

A. Whether the photographed body constitutes “the body of another person who may cause a sexual humiliation or sense of shame” should be objectively determined by taking into account whether the body falls under the body that may cause a sexual humiliation or sense of shame from the perspective of the general and average person of the same gender and age group as the victim, as well as the circumstances leading to the photographer’s intent as well as the degree of clothes, pictures, exposure, etc. of the victim in question, the place and the location of photographing, the degree of photographing, the image of the taken body, and the importance of a specific body part, etc.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2008Do7007 Decided September 25, 2008, etc.). B.

According to the evidence evidence, the image of the taken female two telegraphs is marked at a rate of about 1/3 of the entire screen, and all of the above women suffered a little short flasor or flas, but cannot be seen as excessive exposure, and the photograph taken by the defendant seems to have taken the entire image of female two figures at a somewhat far away distance from the point of view, rather than being taken by emphasizing the specific parts of the body of the female in a specific angle at the close distance, rather than being taken by emphasizing them in a specific angle, the above photograph is considered to have taken the whole image of female two figures at a somewhat far away distance from the general eye height.