The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal by the defense counsel;

A. Among the video images taken by the Defendant by mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, each video recording Nos. 9, 19, and 20 attached to the judgment of the court below was taken on the bridges below the end of the victims who are seated in the subway, and each video recording Nos. 10, 11, 16, and 17, each video recording No. 10, 11, 16, and 17, at an open place.

Therefore, the physical parts of each of the above videos taken by the defendant do not constitute a body that may cause sexual humiliation or shame from the perspective of the general and average persons of the same gender and age group as the persons subject to filming.

Nevertheless, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on “the body of another person who may cause sexual humiliation or sense of shame” in the crime of violating the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Kamera, etc.) by finding the Defendant guilty of all the facts charged in the instant case, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. In light of the following: (a) the Defendant is against unreasonable sentencing; (b) there is no record of criminal punishment; (c) voluntarily completed sexual assault prevention education after the instant crime; and (d) there is a concern for withdrawal from the workplace where a fine or heavier punishment is finalized; and (d) the lower court’s sentence imposing an order to complete sexual assault treatment programs for 2 million won and 40 hours is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. (1) The Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and Protection of Victims Thereof, which punishs the act of photographing another person’s body against his will, which may cause sexual humiliation or shame by using a camera or other similar mechanism, shall not be taken without permission of the victim of the personality chain.