[1] The meaning of "obscenity act" under Article 245 of the Criminal Code

[2] The case holding that an act of Jeonra's women nud's nud's model to publicize the required nud's product constitutes a crime of public performance and obscenity, where nud's nud's nud's nud's act was conducted by cutting off the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of

[1] The term "obscenity act" as stipulated in Article 245 of the Criminal Code refers to an act contrary to the concept of sexual intent by stimulating ordinary people's sexual desire and impairing normal sexual humiliation by stimulating them, and it does not necessarily require the act to describe sexual behavior or display sexual intent.

[2] The case holding that the acts of Jeonra's women nud's nud's model, such as general spectators and reporters, are committed as a crime of public performance and obscenity in which nud's nud's nud's body was cut off by tightly exposing the nur's body by leaving the body in the stage and spreading the arr's body with the arr's lad's body with the arr's lad's lad's body, and facing the arr's body with the arr's body by spreading the arr's body into the body

[1] Article 245 of the Criminal Code / [2] Article 245 of the Criminal Code

[1] Supreme Court Decision 94Do2413 delivered on June 16, 1995 (Gong1995Ha, 2673) Supreme Court Decision 97Do937 delivered on August 22, 1997 (Gong1997Ha, 2968) Supreme Court Decision 2000Do4372 delivered on December 222, 2000 (Gong2001Sang, 402) Supreme Court Decision 2002Do2889 Delivered on August 23, 2002 (Gong2002Ha, 2273) (Gong2073) Supreme Court Decision 203Do2911 Delivered on July 22, 2005 (Gong2005Ha, 1457)

Defendant 1 and three others

Defendants

Attorney Ansan-gu et al.

Seoul Central District Court Decision 2003No6401 Delivered on January 21, 2005

All appeals are dismissed.

The term “obscenity act” under Article 245 of the Criminal Act refers to an act contrary to the concept of sexual morality by stimulating ordinary people’s sexual desire and impairing normal sexual humiliation (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2000Do4372, Dec. 22, 2000; 2003Do2911, Jul. 22, 2005); and it does not necessarily require the expression of sexual behavior or expression of sexual intent.

Examining the evidence admitted by the lower court in light of the record, the Defendants and Nonindicted 1, and Nonindicted 2: (a) newly developed a cooperative and recruited to participate in a public performance by contributing to the Jeonra’s female nudr model to promote the nudr product required to be sold at the market; and (b) from January 26, 2003 to 16:20, the Defendants and Nonindicted 1, and Nonindicted 2:3, and 4, as a female nudr model, were required to enter the instant criminal facts by fully revealing their body and body in the manner of cutting off the ladr body and exposing the ladr’s body, and from January 26, 2003 to 16:20.

Furthermore, in light of the above legal principles, even if the above act does not constitute an act of describing a sexual act or expressing sexual intent, it is reasonable to view that it constitutes an obscene act contrary to the concept of sexual morality by stimulating ordinary people's sexual humiliation and impairing normal sexual humiliation. Meanwhile, it cannot be readily concluded that the above act does not have any character as an act of delivering messages to the effect that the above act makes a cleaning agent, which symbolizes the ladity of the ladity, create a clean ladry, by neglecting the sexual humiliation. However, the principal purpose of the above act was commercial to publicize the required ladry product, and the method and degree of physical exposure made in this case exceeded the necessary degree in promoting the above product, so it cannot be denied.

In light of the record, it is sufficient to recognize that the Defendants planned or directly participated in the above act with the intent of the above act and the process of the development. Therefore, the assertion that there was no conspiracy or intention on the crime cannot be accepted.

In the same purport, the judgment of the court below which found a person guilty of obscenity is just, and it does not err in the misapprehension of the rules of evidence or by misapprehending the legal principles as to the elements of obscenity and crime in the crime of obscenity, as alleged in the grounds of appeal.

Therefore, all appeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Park Si-hwan (Presiding Justice)