The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 15 million.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) The lower court found Defendant 1 guilty of the instant facts charged on the following grounds: (a) In the case of violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (Indecent Act by deceptive means, etc.), it is difficult for the victims’ statement that conform to this part of the charges to believe.

Even if the Defendant made some physical contact to the victims, it cannot be viewed as an "indecent act".

B) In the case of a violation of the Personal Information Protection Act, “the act that the Defendant sent content-certified mail to his/her address or informs the B attorney of his/her address using the said address” under Article 19 of the Personal Information Protection Act does not constitute “the act of using personal information for any purpose other than the intended purpose of receiving the personal information.” Even if falling under this, the Defendant’s act constitutes “political act” under Article 20 of the Criminal Act or “the mistake of law” under Article 16 of the Criminal Act, and thus, illegality is excluded. 2) The lower court’s punishment (fine 20 million won) is too unreasonable.

B. We find the lower court’s sentence is too unfilled and unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the defendant's misconception of facts or misapprehension of legal principles

A. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged on the following grounds: (a) the violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (Indecent Acts, etc. against the victim E on June 2016) (excluding the crime committed around June 2016).

In light of the circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated in the original judgment and the party instance, the judgment of the lower court (limited to the corresponding part; hereinafter the same shall apply) is justifiable. Therefore, this part of the Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

In particular, it is the following point.

1) For the following reasons, the victims’ statements that correspond to this part of the facts charged can be trusted. A)