The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (fact-finding) was as follows: (a) the Defendant 1, while playing a game using a mobile phone, found female toilet due to wrong entry into the female toilet while playing the game; and (b) was found out the toilet column in order to verify whether there was witness; (c) intentionally, depending on the victim, did not intentionally injure the female toilet by hiding it into the female toilet; and (d) did not result in a specific act focused on the body by specifying the subject of filming, and thus, did not result in the commencement of the execution of shooting using a mobile phone camera.

2. Determination

A. First of all, according to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, ① where the victim was sitting in a female toilet, where the victim was placed in the partitions, the victim was placed in the kitchen, and the sound in the toilet is considered to have been dried in the toilet in the victim’s side. The sound in the toilet is considered to have been dried in the toilet lid. On the other hand, the victim’s behavior cannot be seen to have been sufficiently known that the defendant was able to take part in the male toilet, ② the defendant escaped from the female toilet to the male toilet, and entered the toilet lid, ③ Meanwhile, the victim’s voice and the female toilet lid, and the fact that the defendant was able to take part in the male toilet. In light of this, the defendant’s behavior cannot be seen to have been able to take part in the female toilet, and the defendant’s behavior cannot be seen to have been able to take part in the female toilet, as he stated by mistake.