The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. According to the evidence, such as CCTV images submitted by the prosecutor of the gist of the grounds for appeal, the fact that the defendant committed emotional abuse against victimized children can be acknowledged.

The judgment of the court below which acquitted this part of the facts charged is erroneous by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the legislative purpose and basic ideology of the Child Uniform Act, characteristics of emotional abuse that may exert a fatal influence on the development of children’s personality, the types of abuse, and the legislative structure of the Child Welfare Act, related precedents and academic circles, which provide that the act of physical and emotional abuse and the act of abandonment and neglect shall be punished as the same statutory penalty, and discussions of the relevant precedents and academic circles, the term “ emotional abuse that may injure the mental health and development of children” under Article 17 subparag. 5 of the Child Welfare Act refers to “an act that may interfere with the normal maintenance of the attitude and attitude of the mind and attitude of determining a child who thought that the child feel an object, or cause considerable danger to it, and that is an act that may cause damage to the child’s body, abandonment or neglect.”

This interpretation may be somewhat abstract and broad, but it is intended to realize the legislative purport of the entire child clothes law that intends to guarantee the health and happiness, safety and welfare of children by protecting children from various forms of emotional abuse. As to what act constitutes emotional abuse, it can be embodied by the interpretation and cooking of a judge in light of the degree of tangible force imposed on children, motive and background leading up to such act, age and health conditions of victimized children, the offender’s ordinary tendency and attitude at the time of the act, repetition or duration of the act, etc. (see Constitutional Court Decision 2014Hun-Ba266, Oct. 21, 2015).