The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The judgment of the court below which acquitted the Defendant of the primary facts charged in this case on the ground that the video products distributed by mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles were engaged in a sexual act against children and juveniles, and such video is not a child and juvenile pornography, and thus, constitutes a child and juvenile pornography, it erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment

B. In light of the various sentencing conditions in the instant case of unfair sentencing, the lower court’s sentence against the Defendant (one million won of a fine) is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Judgment on misconception of facts or misapprehension of legal principles

A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is the person using the “C” from the file tank (www.fil joint and several) that is the Internet site. On May 2, 2013, the Defendant: (a) connected the said file file file file file sharing program to the “C” using a computer at the above place of residence; (b) installed the Internet file sharing program using the computer; and (c) displayed the obscene video of the title “VIP .........” on the street with children and juveniles’ contribution, and publicly displayed it by allowing many and unspecified members to access it.

B. The lower court acquitted the Defendant of the primary charges of this case on the following grounds.

1) As to the terms of “child or juvenile pornography”, Article 2(5) of the former Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (amended by Act No. 11572, Dec. 18, 2012) defines “children, juveniles, or persons or representations that may be perceived as children or juveniles” but was wholly amended by Act No. 11572, Dec. 18, 2012, the term “children or juveniles, or persons or representations that may be clearly perceived as children or juveniles.”