The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the reasons for appeal is that the sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (five months of imprisonment, forty hours of order to complete a program, confiscation) is too unreasonable.

2. It appears that the Defendant appears to have committed the instant crime, and that the victim did not want to be punished against the Defendant by agreement with the victim at the lower court, and that there seems to have been no secondary damage due to the spread of photographs caused by the instant crime, such as the fact that the injured party wanted to take the Defendant’s wife against the Defendant, and that there was no secondary damage due to the spread of photographs caused by the instant crime.

However, even though the Defendant had been punished once for the same crime, the Defendant used mobile phone camera functions to take or attempt to take the image of the victim, who is a ward in the workplace, in two times, to take or attempt to take a photograph from the toilet.

Along with the method or form of the instant crime, the liability for the instant crime is not less severe, and the fact that the victim seems to have suffered a considerable sense of sexual humiliation and mental impulse due to the Defendant’s crime is considered to be disadvantageous to the Defendant.

In full view of the above favorable circumstances and other circumstances, such as the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, family relationship, motive and circumstance of a crime, and circumstances that are conditions for sentencing as shown in the pleadings, even if considering all favorable circumstances for the Defendant, the lower court’s punishment cannot be deemed to be unfair as it is too unreasonable, since the Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.