The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles) is true that the Defendant sent the victim a text message as stated in the facts constituting an offense in the lower judgment (hereinafter “instant text message”).

However, the Defendant sent the instant text message to the victim for the purpose of expressing the victim’s awareness, and the Defendant did not aim to arouse or satisfy his sexual desire.

2. In full view of the following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court, the Defendant’s sending the instant text message to the victim for the purpose of inducing or meeting his/her sexual desire.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

A. On March 2015, the Defendant, while attending a computer course at H Social Welfare Center, became aware of the victim who opened the said course from March 2015, and was not closely related to the victim at the time of the instant case.

B. The victim’s text message sent to himself/herself by an investigative agency was a content that leads to a sense of sexual humiliation.

The statements were made (Evidence Nos. 22, 23, 76, and 77). The victim's national defense counsel submitted to the court of original trial "the victim was under stress so that he/she could not lead a daily life due to the defendant's act (the nine pages of the trial record).

The instant text message contains an explicit sexual expression, such as treating the victimized person as the subject of sexual activity.

3. In conclusion, the Defendant’s appeal is dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is groundless. It is so decided as per Disposition by the Constitutional Court (Article 42(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (wholly amended by Act No. 11556, Dec. 18, 2012).

“.........”