Of the facts charged in the instant case, the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment of Sexual Crimes.

The acquittal portion

1. The primary charge is that there was a dispute between the victims of the crime and the primary charge, due to the issue of foreign substances in which the damaged person was delivered from the restaurant customer with the trade name of E, in which the injured party D (32 tax) serves as the delivery source.

On April 28, 2017, at around 13:18, the Defendant sent the horses that may cause sexual humiliation and aversion to the victim 10 times in total, as shown in the list of crimes in the attached Table, including the following: (a) the Defendant, while making telephone conversations with the victim at the Defendant’s residence of the Seo-gu Incheon F, F, 108 Dong 701, as the above problem; and (b) the Defendant, while making telephone conversations with the victim, sent the horses that may cause sexual humiliation and aversion to the victim 10 times in total.

As a result, the Defendant reached the victim with a view to meeting his own or another person's sexual desire, which may cause sexual humiliation or aversion through telecommunications media, such as telephone.

2. Article 13 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes provides for the punishment of “a person who sends another person any words, sounds, letters, pictures, images, or other things that may cause a sense of sexual shame or aversion (hereinafter “a picture, etc.”) by telephone, mail, computer, or other means of communication with intent to arouse or satisfy his/her or another person’s sexual desire.”

Here, the issue of whether the Defendant or another person’s sexual desire is “for the purpose of inducing or meeting the victim’s sexual desire” ought to be determined reasonably in light of social norms by comprehensively taking account of various circumstances, such as the relationship between the Defendant and the victim, motive and background of the act, means and method of the act, details and mode of the act, nature and scope of the other party, etc. (see Supreme Court Decision 2016Do21389, Jun. 8, 2017). In other words, the following circumstances recognized by the evidence of this case, namely, the victim, even based on the facts charged itself.