The judgment below is reversed, and the case is remanded to Incheon District Court Panel Division.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. The lower court determined that whether a person constitutes “persons recognized as children or juveniles” in relation to obscene materials for children or juveniles as prescribed by the former Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (wholly amended by Act No. 11572, Dec. 18, 2012; hereinafter the same shall apply), should be determined based on whether the general public can recognize the relevant person or representations as children or juveniles in consideration of the specific circumstances described in obscene materials, methods of expression, etc. based on the “content,” and, in full view of the evidence adopted by the first instance court, the lower court affirmed the lower court’s judgment that found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of the crime of this case as is, on the grounds that (i) the character of a person recognized as a juvenile appeared in his/her video and the character of a person expressed in his/her clothes, and (ii) the character of a person expressed in his/her uniform to be obscene as a student or juvenile.

2. However, we cannot accept the above judgment of the court below for the following reasons.

Article 2 subparagraph 1 of the former ASEAN provides that "child or youth refers to a person under the age of 19: Provided, That a person who meets the 19th of January of the year in which he/she attains the age of 19 shall be excluded herefrom;" and Article 2 subparagraph 5 of the same Act provides that "child or youth pornography" refers to a person who may be perceived as a child or youth, or a person or representations that may be perceived as a child or youth, and expresses any of the acts under subparagraph 4 or other sexual acts, such as films, video, game software, or images, videos, etc. through computers or other communications media.