2014 Highest885 Violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Use of Cameras, etc.)

(Recording)

김ㅁㅁ ( 82년생, 남 ), 무직

Residential Suwon City

Busan District Court

Newly Inserted by Presidential Decree No. 2010, Dec. 1, 201>

Law Firm Hansung, Attorney Noh Young-young

June 16, 2014

The defendant shall be innocent.

The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

1. Summary of the facts charged

On December 27, 2013: at around 00, the Defendant taken the body of the victim against the victim’s will, by photographing the victim’s legs, etc. over two minutes from a cell phone with a camera function attached to the victim, who was subject to the reduction of the victim’s hair, while the victim’s cosmetic female employee was frighted, while taking the victim’s clothes, etc. at a Kamera function attached to him/her, and then taken the victim’s body against the victim’s will.

2. Determination

(1) Article 14-2(1) of the Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and Protection, etc. of Victims thereof (hereinafter “former Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes”) provides that the act of photographing another person’s body, which may cause sexual humiliation or shame against the latter’s will shall be punished by using a camera or other similar mechanism, shall be aimed at protecting the victim’s sexual freedom and freedom not taken without permission. Whether the taken body of another person, which may cause sexual humiliation or shame, constitutes “the body of another person,” such as a victim’s sex, age group, and average person, should be objectively considered in light of the aforementioned legal principles, such as the victim’s clothes, degree of exposure, etc., the victim’s intent and appearance taken, degree of photographing, and image of taken pictures, etc., the court’s determination of the above facts charged should be made relatively more than 280,708, etc. (see Supreme Court Decision 2005Da287828, Feb. 28, 2008).

① Although a woman taken a short horse, it does not reach excessive exposure beyond the ordinary level. The Defendant taken the front and side of the part from a certain distance to a new outbreak only once on the front and side of the body, respectively, within a certain distance of distance.

② The Defendant did not take a photograph by specifying the attitude which causes sexual humiliation and the case where excessive exposure occurs as a result of a woman’s natural appearance (which seems to be a form of working in the beauty room).

③ The instant pictures taken by the Defendant as they were, rather than in a special angle or a special way, in the view of a person, and it is difficult to view that the instant pictures taken by particularly buckbucks or bridges, by emphasizing the specific parts of the bucks or bridges.

④ The degree of clothes or exposure of a woman expressed in the instant pictures taken by the Defendant is merely that can be seen as sleeping in daily life, and it is difficult to view that the female sleeped sexual humiliation beyond the displeasure sense.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, since the above facts charged constitute a case where there is no proof of a crime, a not-guilty verdict pursuant to the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act and a summary of the judgment of the defendant pursuant to Article 58 (2)

Judges Dokop