The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

While the Defendant was thought that North Korea sent out the cryption form through the media, etc., the Defendant only created a motion picture with a view to finding out the cryption age of an officially recognized victim and threatening that the victim’s body might be damaged, and thus, it does not constitute a crime.

2. Article 74(1)3 and Article 44-7(1)3 of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, Etc., of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, Etc. punishs any person who repeatedly sends codes, words, sound, image, or motion picture that arouses fear or apprehension through an information and communications network.

Whether “the act of repeatedly reaching another person” constitutes “the act of repeatedly causing fear and apprehension” ought to be determined by comprehensively taking into account the contents, method and meaning of expression sent by the Defendant to the other party; relationship between the Defendant and the other party; the course and frequency of sending the text; circumstances before and after, and circumstances faced by the other party.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2018Do14610 Decided November 15, 2018 (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2018Do14610, Nov. 15, 2018). In light of the following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, namely, that the video produced and posted by the Defendant included the content that the victim would suffer from the death of K, and that the victim would have caused fear and apprehensions, and that the victim could not lead a life harming mental impulse, and that the Defendant would not take any measures except for the video produced and posted in B channel, as described in the facts charged, even if the Defendant asserted that he had known the victim’s personal safety, it appears that he did not take measures.