The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds of appeal (the factual misunderstanding or misunderstanding of legal principles) is sufficient to make the victim feel a sense of sexual humiliation, even though the photograph taken by the defendant of this case does not have a very high degree of to stimulate sexual humiliation or to cause a sense of sexual shame, and the defendant himself took a photograph of his body against his will, as it is sufficient to make the victim feel a sense of sexual humiliation, and as such, the crime of the defendant itself constitutes the photographing of another person’s body which causes sexual humiliation.

In addition, even if the photograph taken by the speaker is not sufficient to cause sexual humiliation or a sense of sexual shame, so long as the defendant reported the victim's hysium, and taken the victim's sexual humiliation, it should be punished for attempted crimes.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the facts charged of this case is erroneous by misapprehending the legal principles or misapprehending the legal principles.

2. Determination

A. A. Around January 15, 2014, the summary of the facts charged found at the main point of “D” located in Seo-gu Daejeon, Daejeon around January 21, 2014, that the victim E (n, 24 years old) who drinks alcohol on the side is exposed to the victim E (n, she) and that the victim’s cell phone was taken without the victim’s consent.

As a result, the defendant taken the body of another person, who could cause sexual humiliation or shame, using a camera or other similar mechanism, against his will.

B. The lower court’s judgment: (a) taken the entire form of the victim at a certain distance from the time when the Defendant taken the victim’s appearance; and (b) at the time, the victim was suffering from red coloring in the color of the body of the victim, or was sitting down naturally as the consignee or the deceased; and (c) the shape was shorter than the body of the victim.