The judgment below

The part of the defendant's case shall be reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of two million won.

The defendant above.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. At the time of mistake of facts, the victim knew that the defendant taken photographs and consented to the photographing, or at least the defendant thought that he/she consented to the photographing.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (a fine of two million won, etc.) is too unreasonable.

2. In determining the credibility of a statement after the first instance court proceeded with the witness examination procedure in the criminal trial procedure for determining the defendant's assertion of mistake, not only is it consistent with the rationality, logic, morality or rule of experience in the contents of the statement itself, but also is consistent with the witness evidence or third party's statement in the witness examination protocol, such as the appearance or attitude of a witness who is going to the witness statement in the open court after being sworn before a judge, and the penance of the statement, which is difficult to record in the witness examination protocol, should be evaluated as credibility by directly observing various circumstances that are difficult to record.

On the other hand, the appellate court's determination of credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance court under the current Criminal Procedure Act is based on the records including the witness examination protocol in principle, so it has an essential limitation that the appearance and attitude of the witness at the time of the statement that can be considered one of the most important elements in determining credibility of the statement can not be reflected in the evaluation of credibility.

Considering the difference between the first instance court and the appellate court’s method of evaluating the credibility of the testimony made by the witness of the first instance court in accordance with the spirit of the principle of direct examination adopted by the Korean Criminal Procedure Act, there are special circumstances to deem that the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of the testimony made by the witness of the first instance court was clearly erroneous, or that the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of the testimony made by the witness of the first instance court was made based on the evidence duly examined by the first instance court and the evidence duly