All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

“Apparent materials that can be clearly perceived as a child or juvenile” under Article 2 subparag. 5 of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (hereinafter “Juvenile Protection Act”) means expressive materials that can be clearly perceived as a juvenile from an objective point of view from the perspective of the average person. In individual cases, determination should be made after careful consideration of various circumstances, such as a description of a person’s appearance and physical appearance, voice or horse, uniform, situation setting, and background or reduced distance of video works.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2015Do863 Decided May 30, 2019). The lower court convicted Defendant A of all of the charges of aiding and abetting Defendant A’s violation of the Juvenile Sex Protection Act (production and distribution, etc. of obscene materials) against Defendant D, on the ground that the instant cartoon video constitutes a child or juvenile pornography as prescribed by the Juvenile Sex Protection Act, on the following grounds: (a) comprehensively taking account of the following: (b) the appearance of the cartoon videos posted by the Defendants on each Internet web site appears to be less than 19 years of age; (c) the appearance of the cartoon videos appear to be less than 19 years of age; (d) the appearance of the appearing persons wear the school uniform; and (e) the overall background or remote distance is clearly specified as the premise of school life prior to graduation.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the aforementioned legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine on child and juvenile pornography, contrary to the grounds of appeal, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

Therefore, all appeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.