The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

A. Although the Defendant did not explicitly notify the victim of the fact at the time of committing the act in violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Ameras, Use and Screening of Cameras, etc.), it is thought that the victim gave implied consent to the shooting of the victim, as well as the relationship between the victim and the 10-year amnesty and the sexual intercourse.

Therefore, the defendant did not have any awareness and intent to take a sexually related video recording against the victim's will.

Nevertheless, the court below found the Defendant guilty of violating the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes among the facts charged in the instant case and erred by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. In light of the fact that the defendant's wrong recognition of unreasonable sentencing and expressed the victim's intention not to want the punishment of the defendant, and that the defendant has no record of criminal punishment, the sentence of the court below which sentenced the order to complete a sexual assault treatment program program for 3,00,000 won and 40 hours is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The lower court, based on the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court’s determination on the assertion of mistake of facts, can be acknowledged based on the following circumstances, i.e., ① the victim: (a) sent a text message to the head of a private teaching institute, who was working at the private teaching institute, and the Defendant, who would have been dead for ten years; and (b) the victim, who would have recently been married, would have been able to end up well on September 11, 2015, by sending out text messages to the effect that the Defendant would die; and (c) finally, the Defendant was sexual intercourse with the Defendant on September 11, 2015. At that time, the Defendant stated that he was unaware of the Defendant’s sexual intercourse taking the face of the sex relationship; and (b) the Defendant stated that “the victim would have hyd himself and herself by the victim on August 2015.”