The previous Act wholly amended by Act No. 11556, Dec. 18, 2012, which punishs an act of photographing another person’s body, which may cause sexual humiliation or shame, using a camera or other similar mechanism, against the latter’s will.

A. The former Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment of Sexual Violence (hereinafter referred to as “former Act”).

The purpose of Article 13(1) is to protect the victim’s sexual freedom and freedom not to be taken without permission. Whether the recorded body constitutes “other person’s body that may cause sexual humiliation or shame” is objectively considered as “the body of the victim” from the perspective of the general and average people of the age group, such as the victim’s sex and age group, and as well as the degree of exposure, etc. Furthermore, a specific individual and individual decision should be made by comprehensively taking into account the following factors: (a) the degree of exposure of the victim’s clothes; (b) the background leading up to the photographer’s intent; (c) the place and degree of filming; (d) the image of the taken body, and the importance of the specific body parts (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Do7007, Sept. 25, 2008). The lower court recognized the Defendant’s physical humiliation against the victim’s intent to have taken the victim’s body over three times, and thus, found the Defendant guilty of the victim’s bodily humiliation or the punishment of sexual assault.”

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the aforementioned legal doctrine and the evidence duly admitted by the first instance court, the lower court’s measure is justifiable, and contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal.