2014 Highest 2013 Violation of the Special Act on the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Kameras, etc.)

Gamgraphing

A person shall be appointed.

Residence

Nationality

nan

nan

May 23, 2014

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,500,00.

When the defendant fails to pay the above fine, the defendant shall be confined in a workhouse for the period converted into one day.

In order to order the provisional payment of an amount equivalent to the above fine.

Of the facts charged in the instant case, the charge of not guilty of violating the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes against the attached Table Nos. 1, 3, and 32, among the charges in the instant case.

1. Criminal facts;

On March 21, 2014: around 00, at the active service platform of subway No. 4 located in the Southern-dong, Jungdong, Seoul, the defendant taken a picture of the victim's name unexploited part of the bridge, such as Nokia's mobile phone No. 2, written in attached Table No. 2.

Accordingly, the defendant taken the body of the victim who could cause sexual humiliation or shame by using a mobile phone with the camera function against his will.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Police seizure records;

1. Each photograph;

Application of Statutes

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

Article 14 (1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Selection of Fines)

1. Detention in a workhouse;

Articles 70 and 69(2) of the Criminal Act

1. Order of provisional payment;

Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

Grounds for sentencing

1. The scope of punishment: Fines not exceeding 10,00,000 won;

2. The recommended sentencing criteria: The sentencing criteria are not set.

3. Determination of sentence: The reasons for fine 1,500,000 won: in consideration of the fact that there is no record of punishment in the Republic of Korea, the selection of photographs taken by the Republic of Korea, and the fact that the mistake is divided after committing the crime, the amount of fine is selected and the amount of the fine was determined.

Whether the order to complete program is imposed

Considering the fact that the defendant is a ship of Chinese nationality that is not proficient at the end of the Republic of Korea, the degree of selection of photographs taken, and other circumstances, the defendant's order to complete the course falls under "any special circumstances where it is impossible to impose an order to attend the course or order to complete the course" under the proviso of Article 16 (2) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes. Therefore, no order

Personal Information to be registered and submitted

Where a conviction becomes final and conclusive due to the instant crime, the Defendant falls under a person subject to registration of personal information under Article 42 (1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes and falls under Article 43 of

The head of the competent police office shall have a duty to submit personal information.

Whether to issue an order to disclose or notify registered personal information.

In full view of the Defendant’s age, occupation, risk of repeating a crime, type, motive, process, seriousness of the crime, degree and anticipated side effects of the Defendant’s disadvantage due to the disclosure order or notification order, the prevention and effect of sexual crimes subject to registration which may be achieved therefrom, and the effect of protecting the victims, etc., the disclosure order or notification order shall not be issued to the Defendant, on the grounds that there are special circumstances under which personal information shall not be disclosed or notified pursuant to the proviso of Article 49(1) and the proviso of Article 50(1) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse.

The acquittal portion

1. Summary of the facts charged

On March 23, 2014: around 00, the Defendant taken pictures of an unspecified female body part of the body part of the victim, which was opened in Kameras, using a cell phone, from March 21, 2013 to March 23, 2013, including taking photographs of the part of the victim’s bridge in the name of the victim sitting in Kameras, from March 21, 2013 to March 23, 2013, such as the list of crimes Nos. 1 and 3 to 32, against his will.

Accordingly, the defendant taken the body of the victims who could cause sexual humiliation or shame by using a mobile phone with the camera function against their will.

2. Determination

Article 14(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes, etc. of Sexual Crimes, which punishs the act of photographing another person's body, which may cause sexual humiliation or sense of shame against the latter's will, is to protect the victim's sexual liberty and freedom not taken without permission. Thus, whether the body of another person is objectively "the body of another person, which may cause sexual humiliation or sense of shame or shame" should be determined relatively by taking into account not only the victim's clothes, screen, degree of exposure, etc., but also the circumstances leading to the photographer's intent, place and distance of photographing, image of the taken original board, and height of the specific body part (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Do7078, Sept. 25, 2008).

According to evidence evidence, it is recognized that the defendant satisf or grated out of the body of young women suffering from the short flat, half-flat, or body size of the defendant's indictment Nos. 1, 3, or 32, at each time and at each place. However, the above photographs taken by the defendant do not appear to have taken one or more specific parts of the body of all women within a certain distance, but rather taken from a specific angle, rather than taken from the nearest distance, they are hard to readily conclude that the body part of the defendant's body was exposed to the above. However, it cannot be viewed as excessive exposure beyond the ordinary level of women under the same age group in the downtown, and it cannot be viewed that the defendant's act of photographing the defendant's body cannot be seen as being open or gratized in Seoul, with the reason that the period of stay in the Republic of Korea is no longer available, and thus, it cannot be viewed that the defendant's act of photographing the defendant's body cannot be seen as open or grat.

Thus, the facts charged in this part constitute a case where there is no proof of crime, and thus, the defendant is acquitted under the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.

Judges Ansan-gu

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.