No person shall distribute, openly exhibit or show child or juvenile pornography.

Nevertheless, around June 30, 2012, the Defendant, at Pyeongtaek-si B apartment and C, which is the Defendant’s residence, connected D, which is the Internet file sharing site, to the Defendant’s father E’s “IF” under the Defendant’s father E’s name (the “IF”), spreaded the obscene animation and video file with the female students and the male students’ home members’ home members, who are in a dynamic relationship with the Defendant, as the title “G”, so that they can be seen by other people.

Summary of Evidence

1. The defendant's partial statement (the defendant and his/her defense counsel claimed that animation in the judgment does not constitute "child or juvenile pornography" as a virtual obscenity where the present child or juvenile does not appear. The phrase "recognent representations that can be perceived as a child or juvenile" should not be determined with only the description or appearance of "regnent" but rather with the overall appearance of such expressions, such as the production motive and background of media, such as images or videos, which expressed various sexual acts, the degree of the present sexual act, the relation between the present figures, the overall background or distance, and obscenity, etc. shall be determined by taking into account the following factors: (The Constitutional Court en banc Decision 2013Hun-Ba24, 2013Hun-Ba85 (Joint) Decided June 25, 2015). The court below en banc Decision 2013Hun-Ba17, 2013Hun-Ba85 (Joint) where the defendant's his/her clothes suffered by his/her chest and his/her her chest, where he/she is son or son son who suffered by his/her chest.