The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. According to the defendant's cell phone digital analysis, the defendant's cell phone digital analysis results show the fact that the defendant photographs the victim's body and then confirms the photograph immediately. In addition to the victim's consistent statement, the court below erred in the misapprehension of the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant of the facts charged in this case, despite the fact that the defendant knew that he was a female-child victim's body at the right side side of the female toilet, even if he did not have the fact that

2. Determination

A. In full view of various circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the court below found the defendant not guilty of the facts charged in this case on the ground that it is difficult to readily conclude that the defendant had the intent to photograph pictures against the victim's will against the victim's intention, and it constitutes a case where there is no evidence to prove otherwise, and there is no evidence to prove otherwise. Thus, the court below found the defendant not guilty of the facts charged in this case on the ground that there is no evidence to prove the above-mentioned circumstances.

B. According to evidence, such as the result of the Defendant’s cell phone digital analysis lawfully adopted and investigated by the lower court, the Defendant’s execution of the I App installed in his gallon S8 smartphones, and set up smartphones on the upper side of the screen room located on the right side of the female toilet, and the victim sits in order to see the balle (hereinafter “the first photograph”).