2020No2178, 2021No236 (Consolidated)

(a) Organization of a criminal organization (name of a crime recognized with regard to Defendant D: Admission to a criminal organization, activities of a criminal organization);

(b) Admission to criminal organizations;

(c) Criminal organization activities;

(d) Violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (production, Distribution, etc. of obscenity);

(e) Violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse;

(f) Violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Kameras and photographing);

(g) Violation of the Child Welfare Act (sexual harassment, etc. mediating sexual harassment against a child);

(h) Fraud;

(i) Fraud;

B. Violation of the Personal Information Protection Act

(k) Attempts to compel;

(l) Violation of the Narcotics Control Act;

(m) Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse Act (production, distribution, etc. of obscene materials);

(n) Violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (Possession of obscenity);

(o) Violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse;

(p) Violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse;

(q) Indecent acts;

(r) Murine;

(s) coercion;

(t) Intimidation;

(u) Murder reserve;

(v) Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes;

(w) Violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse;

(x) Violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (obscenity using communications media);

(y) Violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse;

(z) Similar rape;

(aa) Violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Partial Revocation of Public Prosecution);

(zb) Violation of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information;

(zc) Violation of the Act on Regulation and Punishment of Criminal Proceeds Concealment;

(zd) Demartion;

2020 Jeonno167 (Consolidation), 2021 Jeonno19 (Consolidated)

1.(a)(c)(d)(f)(f)(i)(f)(i)(k)(k)(a)(a)(b)(a)(p)(p)(r.Ir.M.M., T.Ir.

A

3.(c)(d)(f)and (f)and (q)and (V);

C

2.(c)(f);

B

4. A. (d) f.S. S. S. Hab. B.I.D. L.C. O.D.

D

5.(b) D. D. D. H.L.

E

6. b. d. g. H. H.

F

Defendants and Prosecutor

Freeboard, luscing (each indictment and request for attachment order), luscing, and luscing (each whistle);

x) Park Jong-su, Park Jong-su, leap, and leaptable (each public trial);

Attorney G (Defendant A)

Attorney KW (Court line for Defendant B and E)

Attorney KX (the national election for the defendant C)

Attorney J. K (for defendant D)

Law Firm M (for defendant F)

Attorney KY

1. The Seoul Central District Court Decision 2020 Gohap486, 2020 Gohap294, 2020 Gohap74, 2020 Gohap74, 2020 Gohap98 (Joint), 2020 Gohap315 (Joint), 2020 Gohaphap315 (Joint), and 2020 Godan11 (Consolidated);

2. The Seoul Central District Court Decision 2020Gohap866, 2020 Jeon high-ranking34 (Joint Judgment) Decided February 4, 2021

June 1, 2021

Of the judgment of the court below of the first instance, the remaining part of the judgment excluding the part concerning the defendant's case and the case concerning the attachment order case except the part concerning the dismissal of prosecution against the defendant and the person subject to the attachment order Gap, the part concerning the defendant's case against the person subject to the attachment order and the case concerning the defendant Eul

All appeals by Defendant B, E, and F and Prosecutor against the above Defendants are dismissed.

Of the judgment of the court below, the appeal filed by the respondent for attachment order and the prosecutor with respect to the part regarding the claim for attachment order against the respondent C is dismissed.

Of the judgment of the court below of the first instance, the prosecutor's appeal on each dismissed public prosecution by the defendant and the respondent for attachment order A and the defendant D shall be dismissed.

[Defendant and the Requested Party A]

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for forty-two years.

The information on the accused shall be disclosed and notified through an information and communications network for ten years (Provided, That the summary of a sex offense disclosed and notified shall be limited to the crimes of violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse, violation of the Child Welfare Act (indecent act by compulsion, sexual harassment, etc. against a child), violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse), violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (Rape), similar rape, and indecent act by compulsion).

The defendant shall be subject to employment restrictions for ten years in each of institutions, etc. related to children and juveniles and welfare facilities for persons with disabilities.

The attachment of an electronic tracking device shall be ordered to the person requested to attach an electronic device for 30 years.

Matters to be observed in attached Form shall be imposed on the person requested to attach an attachment order.

Nos. 1, 3, 4, and 10 of the Act No. 1537 of the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office in 2020, the evidence Nos. 4 through 8 of the Act No. 8789 of the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office in 2020, and the Seoul Central District Court in 2020, 792, shall be confiscated, respectively, virtual currency listed in the attached Form No. 2020, 2020, 1675 of the Seoul Central District Court in order to preserve confiscation.

108,289,945 won shall be additionally collected from the defendant.

[Defendant and the Requested Party C]

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for 13 years.

The defendant shall be ordered to complete the sexual assault treatment program for 40 hours.

The information on the accused shall be disclosed and notified through an information and communications network for seven years (However, the summary of a sex offense disclosed and notified shall be limited to the indecent act by compulsion in the judgment, violation of the Child Welfare Act (in the case of coercion to commit sexual harassment against children - brokerage), violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (amera, etc.

The defendant shall be subject to employment restrictions for each ten years at child and juvenile-related institutions, etc. and at child-related institutions and welfare facilities for persons with disabilities.

The evidence seized by the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office No. 218 in 2020 shall be confiscated in each of subparagraphs 1 through 5.

[Defendant D]

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for 13 years.

The defendant shall be ordered to complete a sexual assault treatment program for 120 hours.

The information about the accused shall be disclosed and notified through an information and communications network for 10 years (However, the summary of a sex offense disclosed and notified shall be limited to the crime of violating the Child Welfare Act (sexual harassment, etc. mediating to compel a child to engage in such act), violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (hereinafter referred to as the "Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes"), and

The defendant shall be subject to employment restrictions for ten years in each of institutions, etc. related to children and juveniles and welfare facilities for persons with disabilities.

The evidence seizures 1 through 6 of the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office in 2020 shall be confiscated, respectively.

1. Case summary and the scope of this court’s inquiry

The first instance court convicted Defendant A and Defendant D of each intimidation among the facts charged against Defendant A and the person who requested an attachment order (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant”), and Defendant D, and convicted all of the remaining facts charged and the remaining Defendants. On the other hand, all the Defendants and the prosecutor appealed against the first instance judgment. On the other hand, the second instance court dismissed the remainder of the facts charged except for the case of Defendant A’s violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles from Sexual Abuse (production, Distribution, etc. of obscenity) among the facts charged, and violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Act on the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes on March 16, 2020) at the third trial date ( January 20, 2021) of the lower court, based on the public prosecutor’s revocation of the indictment, the second instance court dismissed the prosecution on the remaining facts charged. With respect to the above dismissal decision, the relevant Defendant (A, and attachment order) and the public prosecutor, respectively, appealed the appellate court and the prosecutor respectively.

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Joint defendants

1) The misunderstanding of the judgment of the court of first instance as to the "criminal group"

The crime related to "AK" or "AK Organization (or CA)" is merely a punishment under the lead of Defendant A solely. The remaining Defendants did not have any awareness that the crime group is organized by continuous combination with Defendant A, nor did they participate in activities such as sharing roles and distribution of proceeds from crime. The above AK did not have any organizational structure that makes it possible to combine multiple specific persons and facilitate the planning and execution of the crime. Rather, the crime result produced by Defendant A is merely the situation in which the rest of the Defendants consumed or used the crime result. In light of the fact that the degree of combination or division of roles among the members is not obvious, it cannot be deemed that AK bank et al. has been organized with the substance of "crime group".

2) Unreasonable sentencing (including the judgment of the court below 1 and 2)

Each sentence of the lower court against the Defendants (the first instance court: 40 years of imprisonment for Defendant A; 5 years of short-term of 10 years of imprisonment for Defendant C; 13 years of imprisonment for Defendant C; 15 years of imprisonment for Defendant D; 7 years of imprisonment for Defendant E; 8 years of imprisonment for Defendant F; 5 years of imprisonment for Defendant A; 2 months of imprisonment for Defendant C) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant A (a factual error, misunderstanding of legal principles, and improper attachment order)

1) As to the judgment of the first instance court

A) The part on the violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (similar act) and the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (Rape)

The victim CP (the name of the victim, hereinafter the same shall apply in the case of other victims) committed a sexual intercourse with BG is based on an agreement to pay the amount by photographing the face of the sexual intercourse with a designated person by Defendant A, and the transmission of the face is not due to Defendant A’s threat of the victim’s sexual intercourse. However, the conclusion by the first instance court that the victim’s sexual intercourse was concluded by intimidation is logical and unreasonable.

Even if the sexual relation between the victim and BG is caused by Defendant A’s intimidation, the crime of violating the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (similar sex) against the victim’s CP should be deemed to have been absorbed into the crime of violating the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (Rape) committed on the same opportunity, and thus, it cannot be punished as a separate crime.

B) The part on the case of the attachment order

The order to attach an electronic tracking device for 30 years is more advanced than the life expectancy of Defendant A and is unfair because it is a reflective human right.

2) As to the second judgment of the court below

A) Among coercion against the victim GV, the part of film photographing [Article 2-2-1 (a) (1)], the part of coercion against the victim (KZ) [Article 2-2-1 (b) (2)], each indecent act by force against the victim (LA) [Article 2-2-2 (b) and 2-1 (c) of the original judgment and Article 2-2-2 (1) of the Criminal Act], and the part of similar rape [Article 2-2-2 (b) of the original judgment and Article 2-2-2 (1) of the Criminal Act]

It is not by coercion to have a victim GV photograph and send an emergency exit photograph as indicated in the judgment below. It is not by intimidation to have the victim (KZ) photograph and send an identification card photograph and face photograph. It is not by intimidation to the victim (KZ).

Even if there was a intimidation against the victim (LA), the causal relationship between all subsequent acts and the above intimidation is not acknowledged, and the victim (LA) was not in the state of failing to resist due to the defendant's intimidation at the time of indecent act by force and similar rape against the victim (LA).

B) The assertion of illegality collection evidence related to the possession of child and juvenile pornography

Defendant A’s leading production and distribution of sexual exploitations and the facts of suspicion of the possession of child and juvenile pornography in this part, which have been obtained individually, cannot be seen as having objective relevance. The evidence obtained without a warrant in relation to this part of the criminal facts can be seen as evidence of collection.

C) The part on the case of the attachment order

The order to attach an electronic tracking device for the five-year location is too far long, consistent with the period of the attachment order issued by the court of first instance and unfair because it is a reflective and human right.

C. Defendant B (Definite, misunderstanding of legal principles, and improper employment restriction order)

1) misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

Even if 'AK' is a crime group, Defendant B was aware that the above organization was a crime group, and rather, Defendant A was guilty of fraud. However, there was no perception that it was joining or participating in the crime group.

(ii)an unfair employment restriction order;

Considering the fact that it is difficult for the defendant to expect the economic support of his father after release, the restriction on employment for a long period of time (7 years) is harsh.

D. Defendant C (the fact-finding, misunderstanding of legal principles, defective or weak, and improper attachment order)

1) As to the first instance judgment

A) misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

(1) Part concerning joining criminal organizations and activities of criminal organizations

Even if 'AK' is a criminal group, Defendant C received money from Defendant A as the price for the disposal of stolen goods, and did not know that the organization constitutes a criminal group, and there was no perception that the organization was affiliated with or was engaged in activities. Unlike other Defendants, there was no fact that Defendant C participated in each room established in Q such as AK bank or continued to receive sex exploitation.

(2) The part concerning the crime of violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (production and distribution of obscene materials), violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (Indecent Acts by compulsion), violation of the Child Welfare Act (indecent act against a child), indecent act by compulsion, or intimidation committed in collusion with Defendant A, etc.

Defendant C, without recognizing that Defendant A was committing each of the above crimes in the course of operating the AK bank organization, only shared acts with the awareness of the request from Defendant A for the exchange and withdrawal of the proceeds from the disposal of stolen goods. Therefore, there was no awareness of objective labeling constituting the elements of each of the above crimes. Accordingly, even if Defendant C and Defendant A were to have committed each of the above crimes through the public invitation of Defendant C and Defendant A, it cannot be recognized that the relationship between each of the above crimes is not recognized, and even if Defendant C and Defendant A were to have committed each of the above crimes, it should be deemed that Defendant C bears only the responsibility as a successor co-principal around December 30, 2019, when Defendant C first recognized the relationship between the substance of “AK bank organization” and Defendant A.

(3) Part of the crime of murder preparation

In order to establish the preliminary crime of murder, it is necessary to conduct external preparation for murder and murder. Defendant C did not have the intention of murder, and only exchanged only the death with Defendant A, and did not perform any external preparation act. Defendant C only paid 4 million won as a reward for a simple retaliation, but not as a reward for the commission of murder.

B) misunderstanding of legal principles and unreasonable sentencing due to mental disorder

Defendant C was involved in the crime of Defendant C in the absence or lack of the ability to discern things due to mental or physical disorder caused by the Arasacrific force. Although this constitutes a cause for legal reduction or exemption, the first instance court neglected this.

C) Part 1 of the case for attachment order

The order to attach an electronic tracking device for 10 years is unfair in consideration of the risk of recidivism by Defendant C and other circumstances.

2) As to the second judgment of the court below

A) misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles concerning the crime of concealing criminal proceeds

Defendant C only performed money exchange business, etc. without awareness of the fact that Defendant A operates the AK organization and other Defendant A’s substance or various criminal facts. Thus, despite the absence of awareness of a public conspiracy relation with Defendant A or criminal intent such as concealment of criminal proceeds, Defendant C was guilty on a different premise.

B) misunderstanding of legal principles and unreasonable sentencing due to mental disorder

Defendant C was involved in the crime of Defendant C in the absence or lack of the ability to discern things due to mental disorder arising from the symptoms of Amera or the lack of the ability to make a decision. Although this constitutes a cause for legal mitigation, the second instance court neglected it.

E. Defendant D (De facto mistake, misunderstanding of legal principles)

1) The part concerning the organization of a criminal organization

Even if Defendant D participated in the AK bank and did not post and distribute the sexual exploitations that Defendant D did not directly post and distribute them through the AK bank (the victim GL posted the sex organs to the AK bank, but immediately issued them, so the attempted suspension under Article 26 of the Criminal Act should be acknowledged. This part argues that there is no other reinforcement evidence in addition to Defendant D’s confession), and did not publicize the AK bank, and did not demand the production of sexual exploitations in the AK bank, and it was not a participant in the AK bank. Defendant D did not have any fact that Defendant A participated in the production of sexual exploitations, and thus, Defendant D contributed to organizing the AK bank as a criminal group.

2) Exclusion of illegally obtained evidence

A) On November 6, 2019, the Seoul Yongsan Police Station issued a warrant of seizure, search, and verification (hereinafter “first warrant”) on charges of attempted coercion against the victim HF. Accordingly, seized a mobile phone owned by Defendant D’s gallon S8 mobile phone, and discovered data related to the above criminal facts and the instant criminal facts in the course of conducting digital siren analysis on November 12, 2019. However, the Seoul Yongsan Police Agency, which received the case thereafter, continued editing and correcting the data obtained by the said siren before being issued a new warrant for a separate crime, and on the basis of such data, continued criminal investigations, including newspapers, criminal facts, victims, and inquiries by radio operators, etc.

B) On December 17, 2019, the police issued a warrant of search, seizure, and verification (hereinafter “second warrant”) with respect to a separate crime that was investigated as above. However, the identity between the text of the text of the message No. 2 and that of the text of the CD No. 42 in the process of executing the warrant is not recognized. Moreover, the investigation agency conducted an investigation only in the way that it shows the compressed file after being selected in advance, and then combined and rescinded the compressed file, and did not actually guarantee Defendant D’s right to be present. Moreover, there is an error of law by failing to issue Defendant D a legitimate seizure list, without issuing a detailed list stating the file name and the value of the text of the compressed file, rather than the value of each electronic information.

C) Therefore, evidence obtained on the basis of the warrant Nos. 1 and 2 with respect to Defendant D is inadmissible as evidence collected in breach of the procedure stipulated in the Constitution and the Criminal Procedure Act, and the secondary evidence obtained on the basis thereof cannot be considered as evidence.

F. Defendant E (Def. Error, misunderstanding of legal principles, and improper employment restriction order)

1) misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

A) Even if 'AK' is a crime group, Defendant E did not know that the above group was a crime group, and there was no perception that it was an act to join or belong to it.

B) Since Defendant E was unaware of the fact that the victim (LB) was a child or juvenile, it cannot be applied to the violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse and the violation of the Child Welfare Act. The first instance court found Defendant E guilty with omitting its judgment.

(ii)an unfair employment restriction order;

Defendant E’s employment restriction order (10 years) is excessively unfair.

G. Defendant F (De facto mistake, misunderstanding of legal principles)

Even if “AK Organization” is a criminal group, Defendant F did not know of the production of obscenity by any means at the time when the first act was conducted in AK. Defendant F did not notify the illegal means and took part in the production of obscenity video works. Defendant F was merely a purchaser of obscenity, nor did he/she take a certain position or play a role in relation to the operation and activities of AK, nor did he/she promote AK on another QK room in accordance with the contents publicly notified by Defendant A in mind that he/she would obtain obscenity of more stimulous contents. Defendant F was aware of the intent to take part in the production of obscenity video works without notifying Defendant F of the unlawful means. Defendant F did not take part in the production of obscenity video works. Ultimately, Defendant F did not take part in the criminal organization and did not take part in the criminal organization.

(h) Inspection (unfair form);

1) As to the judgment of the court of first instance (the defendants)

Each sentence sentenced by the court of first instance against the Defendants is too unhued and unfair.

In addition, with respect to Defendant B, E, and F, an order to disclose and notify personal information should be issued, and with respect to Defendant A and C, an order to attach an electronic device for the maximum period permitted by law should be issued.

2) As to the second instance judgment (Defendant A and C)

Each punishment sentenced by the second court against Defendant A and C is too unhued and unfair.

In addition, the Prosecutor's Office against Defendant A omitted the sentence of No. 4 (gallon 9 + mobile phone 11 mobile phone), No. 5 (hon 6 (hon chip), No. 7 (hon chip), No. 8 (SD), among seized articles (2020 type No. 86175) of the Prosecutor's Office against Defendant A (2,243,209 (total proceeds of crime 108,289,945 - 106,736,736, which was sentenced as a surcharge by the first instance court). Furthermore, Defendant A must order Defendant A to attach an electronic device for the maximum period permitted by the law.

3. Ex officio judgment (Defendant A, C, and D);

(a) Decision on consolidated proceedings;

With respect to Defendant A and C, the judgment of the court below was rendered, and the prosecutor and both of the above Defendants filed an appeal, and this court decided to jointly examine the above two appeals cases. Among the judgment of the court of first instance, each of the remaining crimes except the dismissed part regarding Defendant A’s partial intimidation, and each of the crimes in the judgment of the court of second instance and each of the crimes in the judgment of the court of second instance sentenced to Defendant C shall be sentenced to one punishment in accordance with Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act, in relation to each of the concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, in accordance with Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. Each of the crimes in the judgment of the court of first instance against Defendant A and the judgment of the court of second instance except the dismissal part regarding Defendant A’s partial intimidation, and the remainder of the judgment of the court of second instance cannot be maintained as they are.

(b) Amendments to Bill of Indictment;

1) The first instance judgment

In the trial of the court of first instance, the prosecutor added the facts of the organization of the criminal organization among the facts charged against Defendant D in the judgment of the court of first instance as the primary facts charged, added 'contributation of the criminal organization,' and 's activities of the criminal organization' to the preliminary facts charged as stated in paragraph (1) (b) of the same Article, and applied for the modification of an indictment to add them as stated in paragraph (2) of the same Article. This Court permitted this part of the judgment was changed. And as seen below, the court of first instance acquitted the Defendant of the primary facts charged and convicted the Defendant of the ancillary facts charged, the judgment of the court below which only considered the primary facts charged against the

2) The second instance judgment

In addition, with respect to the violation of the Act on the Regulation and Punishment of Criminal Proceeds Concealment among the facts charged against Defendant A and C in the judgment of the court below in the trial of the court of the court of the second instance, the ‘Aggravated act' and ‘a concealment act' are in a substantive competition relationship, and they are concealed for the purpose of pretending the fact about the acquisition and disposition of criminal proceeds, etc., or pretending the fact about the acquisition and disposition of criminal proceeds, etc., the defendant A concealed criminal proceeds for the purpose of pretending the fact about the acquisition and disposition of criminal proceeds, etc., or pretending to the property legitimately acquired. The defendant A concealed the facts about the acquisition and disposition of criminal proceeds, etc. for the purpose of pretending the fact about the acquisition and disposition of criminal proceeds, etc., and concealing the criminal proceeds for the purpose of pretending to be acquired and disposed of.

C. System of determination

However, notwithstanding the above reasons for ex officio reversal, the argument in the grounds for appeal, such as misconception of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, is still subject to the judgment of the court, as otherwise alleged by the other Defendants, thereby examining the above Defendants in sequence.

4. Judgment on the misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles by the Defendants

A. Determination as to the assertion of denial of ‘criminal group' (contestably the defendants)

1) Legal principles relating to "criminal group"

Article 114 of the Criminal Act provides that an act of organizing or joining an organization or group with a intent to commit a crime for a maximum of four years or more shall be punished. A statutory provision punishing a person who forms or joins a crime organization or group is more serious than that of an individual's crime, and that the degree of social harm and injury caused by a crime planned and organized by a crime organization or group is much more serious than that of an individual's crime, and that the risk of crime is sustained as long as the crime organization or group continues to exist and maintains, the legislative intent is to prevent the creation and existence of a crime organization or group with the nature of preparation and conspiracy regardless of whether the crime is committed (see Supreme Court Decision 2009Do2337, Jun. 11, 2009).

In this context, a group aimed at committing a crime refers to ① under the common purpose that multiple persons commit a crime (2) capital punishment, life imprisonment, or imprisonment for a certain period of not less than four years, ③ Members need not have a system that is equipped with an organization that is capable of repeatedly committing a crime (4) by acting in accordance with the division of roles set by the members, and ④ the minimum system required for a crime group (hereinafter referred to as a “criminal group”) but it is not necessary to have a systematic structure that facilitates the planning and implementation of a crime (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2019Do16263, Aug. 20, 2020). A criminal group is established and continued in various forms, and it does not require a specific procedure, such as the organization’s name or demotion, and the organization’s formation or joining form, as long as there is no specific form of punishment (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2014Do12804, Feb. 13, 2013).

The term "organization" in the crime of organization of a group refers to the formation of an aggregate by communication with doctors, and it does not require a certain form, regardless of whether it is a dynamic or passive. It refers to participation in the purport of an already organized organization as a member, and there is no restriction in the method. The term "activities as a member of a group of crimes" refers to an active act aimed at the continuation and maintenance of a group of crimes based on the organizational structure of a group of crimes (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2008Do10177, Sept. 10, 200; 2015Do7081, Sept. 10, 2015). Whether a specific act constitutes "activities" as a member of a group of crimes, etc., should not be determined by considering the date, place and contents of the act in question, motive and circumstances of the act in question, the purpose and circumstances leading up to the act, the relationship between the person who committed the act and its members, etc., as well as the specific circumstances such as 10.

2) Facts of recognition

According to the court below's adopted and examined evidence, the following facts can be acknowledged.

A) The developments leading up to the creation of Defendant A’s one name “AK bank2”

(1) From around September 2018, Defendant A started a criminal act of producing sexual exploitation images by receiving the victim’s pictures, personal information, etc. from LC and five other victims up to August 2019, and by using QAK as the clinic from Aug. 2019 (Defendant A’s legal statement, two rights of the trial records, two rights of the defendant; Defendant A’s interrogation protocol of prosecutor’s investigation as of Mar. 26, 2020; evidence record protocol as of Mar. 26, 2019; and Defendant A as of Aug. 2019; Defendant A’s act of using QAK as the clinic (Defendant A’s legal statement; Defendant A’s two rights of the trial records; Defendant A’s interrogation protocol as to prosecution records as of Mar. 26, 2020; evidence record as of Mar. 74, 204).

(2) On August 3, 2019, Defendant A first became aware of the existence of a sexual exploitation film co-ownership room called QuX bank operated by S (referred to as QX bank if the separate use room was not indicated in front of the clinic; around August 2, 2019, Defendant A entered “AF bank,” which is a nameless winner using QV AE’s obscene materials co-ownership cell room (hereinafter referred to as “group bank”) operated by QV bank on the Internet; around August 3, 2019, Defendant A opened a sexual exploitation video product produced by him to AF bank (a court statement, record 2 rights 986, 987 pages).

(3) After Defendant A told Defendant A to the effect that “I will show more sexual exploitation images than 1.5 million won when IF bank’s money was transferred from AF bank participants for sale of sexual exploitation videos, Defendant A acquired money by means of not actually providing sexual exploitation videos. When such fraud is repeated, Defendant A was forced to withdraw from AF bank manager (hereinafter referred to as “voluntary withdrawal”) due to the repeated dismissal (the Defendant A’s legal statement, second right of trial record, second right of trial record; Defendant A on March 26, 2020; Defendant A’s suspect examination of the prosecution, evidence record, nine right of 776 pages).

(4) When Defendant A was demoted from AF bank as above, around August 2019, Defendant A opened and opened a QU, "AK", "AO" (Defendant A legal statement, 2 rights 98, 989 pages), "AL", "AF bank of AF bank of August 3, 2019, and requested Defendant A to see that Defendant A had no few million won, and that Defendant A had the authority to manage the suspect's interrogation report using BH's evidence on behalf of Defendant A26, "A20, 98, 989 page)," and "AL has the authority to manage the suspect's interrogation report on Defendant A60, 200 won." Defendant A had the authority to manage the suspect's interrogation report on Defendant A67, 206, 360, 360, 360, 47, 60, 67, 46, 76, 60, 67, 46, 76, etc.

(5) Accordingly, from the end of August 2019 to the beginning of September 2019, AO bank operated 10 days from the end of 2019 to the first patrol officer, and operated AOD (as the result, 10 persons, including the 'Name Non- (1)', 'Name-Free' (hereinafter referred to as ‘Name-Free' in the written judgment of the lower court, 'Name-Free' in the written judgment of the lower court, and 'Name-Free' (hereinafter referred to as ‘Name-Free' in the written judgment of the lower court), including the name-free boxes, and one specific name manager (as at the time, Defendant A, as well as the general participants, had the authority of the manager to easily change the authority of the manager) was prevented from accessing BH, and the function of AO room was virtually finished and the operation of AOD was suspended (as the defendant Gap was a suspect's suspect examination right on March 31, 2020; evidence No. 4196, Mar. 6, 20197).

(6) At the time of the operation of the AO room, Defendant A informed the participants of the fact that each image was produced by citing the victims’ images and photographs, including minors, and that each image was made by citing the victims’ sexual intercourse, but the participants were rather friendly in such production process (the fourth protocol of examination of the prosecution No. 4 of March 31, 2020 against Defendant A, the protocol of examination of evidence No. 936, 937 page).

B) Creation, operation, etc. of various AK (AT), 'BE', etc. of Defendant A

(1) On September 2019, Defendant A opened and operated “AT” and “HR” AK under the intention of reporting on the proper use of the BH system with AL, and first introduced the “BE” system by using the pertinent system. The system was based on “BI” (120,000 points or more), “BJ” (35,000 points or more), “BR (15,000 points)” (100 points or more), “BK (10,000 points)” (10,000 points)” (10,000 points) and “ABR” (20,000 points or more), “ABR” (10,000 points or more), “ABR” (20,000 points or more), “ABL” (10,000 points or “ABR”) and “E” (20,000 points or more, and 90,700 or more points or more (20, 50, or more) of evidence.

(2) The points with the above experience points (XP) have been automatically given to participants, and AL has also been granted to participants. The method of obtaining experience points (XP) was: ① a method of holding a large number of hostings (Automatic); ② a method of paying money to Defendant A; ③ a method of promoting AK and certifying AL to Defendant A; ④ a method of transferring obscenity to Defendant A and conducting an auction (passing obscenity); ⑤ a method of transferring obscenity to Defendant A and conducting an auction (passing obscenity); ⑤ a method of certifying AK promotional material referred to as “a large number of revenues” by Defendant A to another Q Group bank or Internet site (passing ever). (On June 20, 2020, 10 suspect examination committee of Defendant prosecution No. 124-1228, Dec. 24, 128; Defendant 2000, Defendant D’s suspect examination protocol No. 2684, Jun. 4, 206).

(3) At the same time, Defendant A put an advertisement, such as “DN channel (PP) opened from around September 10, 2019 to September 25, 2019, where Defendant A wishes to communicate a short direction, Defendant A has a high class of “LF channel” in which only the manager posts and gives access authority to certain persons so that they can read them. “Personal loan certificates are inserted. Personal loan certificates are inserted.” “The actual time period is 20 full time old-age old-age old-age old-age old-age old-age old-age old-age old-age old-age old-age old-age old-age 20 persons who wish to use a short direction, and if Defendant AK participated in a high level of experience point (XP) from around September 10, 2019, Defendant A posted an opportunity to directly take advantage of the victims’ right to access, and Defendant A’s suspect interrogation report on the same type of materials as Defendant A658, 2065.765.65.

(4) At that time, the authority of AK manager was conferred with AL and DaD. At almost all times, LD had maintained access to AKS and actively held, led the atmosphere of holding them. At least 20 times, participants who did not perform special activities, such as participants who did not perform the instructions given by A, creation and change of protogram photographs, participants who generated disturbance within AK, and participants who are deemed to be fraudulent, have periodically withdrawn from AK at the level of AK. (Article 14 of the Prosecutor's Examination Committee as of June 16, 2020, No. 6583, 6584, 6605 of the evidence record, No. 1784). AL also, upon the direction of the Defendant A, made 14 weeks experience points (XP) automatically and automatically paid to the participants, notified the participants of the fact, notified the participants of the fact that the participants did not perform the instructions given by the Defendant, and 14 weeks of disclosure to the public to the extent of Defendant A's frequency of access or 2, etc.

(5) On September 2019, Defendant A made efforts to activate AT, including: (a) Defendant A had been urged to proceed with events that “AT would disclose confidential sexual exploitation images if it reached one level of conversation in Q-type; (b) in order to enhance the order of protection, Defendant A made efforts to promote AT by putting ‘scambling’ to participants; and (c) inserting ‘scaming on a hosting hold (including inserting the same writing into a large quantity)’. Accordingly, Defendant A, AL, LD, and other participants in AK, as Defendant A, A, A, and BD achieved Q-type 1 in Q-type, thereby changing Defendant A’s name into “AU” (the name of Defendant A was changed on March 31, 202, Defendant A’s right to examination of evidence, right to examination of evidence, number 938, number 939, number 939, number 939).

C) Growth, organizing, and organizing AK Bank;

(1) After September 2019, the AP bank established by Defendant A was created and abolished as the name of "AU", "L", "LI", "DN", "AV", and the name of "BE", "L", "LK", and "BF" were changed. Participants admitted to each AK operated by Defendant A can be identified as a member of the relevant AK, who belongs to the relevant AK, and who are in charge of the production of sexual exploitation (the attitude, etc. to be taken by the victim in sexual exploitation video works). Through hosting, it was possible to promptly verify that the victim requested the production of sexual exploitation video works (the victim's right to make a statement in the case of Defendant A, the right to make a statement in the case of Defendant A, the right to make a statement in the case of Defendant A, the right to make a statement in the case of 12, 132, and the right to make a statement in the case of PP.

(2) Defendant A, along with the operation of the AK bank group, posted frequently a letter to make it possible for the victims, including minors, to see that they are engaged in sexual exploitation video works by taking advantage of narcotics and induculs, etc., and by making them into consideration that they are engaged in the production of sexual exploitation video works, Defendant A made a unique feature of AK only by giving sto the sexual exploitation video works shared at AK (Defendant A’s statement in court and page 1016 page 1016 page of trial record).

(3) In order to enable AK management, Defendant A also granted AK manager authority to Defendant B, BR, LD, LD, LE, and other participants [L], LM [Name “Name Non-Name (Name-Inward], LN(Name-Inward in the written judgment of the lower court], LN(Name-Inward in the written judgment of the lower court) and LO(Name-Inward in the written judgment of the lower court], and each of the above participants obtained the above authority from Defendant A and managed AK by around March 2020 (Name-Inward in the written judgment of the lower court), and continuously distributed AK’s statement to A1 and A2 of the total number of participants (name-inward in the written judgment of the lower court) by posting it to AK group as ordered by Defendant A and distributed it to A1 of the first instance court (No.

(4) Defendant A asked the small group participants of each level of attitude they want, and followed their answers [the attitude of Defendant E (the mbridge on the bridge, the name of the port door), Defendant F (the attitude of the marbing the body on the mar, the attitude of dancing, the attitude of the marbing the body on the marb), the Defendant B (the marth attitude, the floor picture), and AL (the attitude of marbling the body on the mar), and CL (the attitude of seeing the mar), etc., followed each of the following contents (the Defendant A’s legal statement, two : 1012, 1014, 1015 page, 1015 page), and produced each of the sexual exploitation images consistent with the content thereof (the Defendant A’s court statement, the trial record on the trial record).

(5) Defendant C, L, and CL (LP), etc. continuously distributed advertising phrases produced by Defendant A to induce the victim on the Internet by using SNS, etc. according to Defendant A’s instructions (Defendant A’s legal statement, Defendant 2 title 1013 page 1013 of the trial record).

(6) Defendant A committed not only online but also sexual assault crimes by communicating BG around October 2019 and CL around March 2020 with the victim’s CP, etc. in order to produce a more stimulous sexual exploitation video (Defendant A’s legal statement and trial record 1015 pages).

(7) AL, 피고인 B, BR는 AK방을 운영하는 과정에서 피고인 A의 지시에 따라 또는 자발적으로 AK방을 키우려는 목적하에 피고인 A이 제작한 각종 성착취 영상물을 직접 AK방에 배포하기도 하였다(피고인 A 법정진술, 공판기록 2권 1021면). 또한 AL, LD, LL, LQ[원심판결문 기재상 "성명불상(⑦)"], LR[LR, 원심판결문 기재상 "성명불상(⑧)"], LT[= LU, 원심판결문 기재상 "성명불상(⑨)"], LE, 피고인 D 등은 개인적으로 직접 제작한 성착취 영상물 등을 AK방에 게시하기도 하였다.

(8) AL and Defendant C performed the role of receiving criminal proceeds from virtual currency (finite) and changing them in cash. Defendant A distributed some of them to AL and Defendant C in the name of transportation cost. Defendant C also played the role of inserting money before the apartment fire extinguishing of the victim EN5 (victim EN5) according to Defendant A’s instructions (Defendant A’s legal statement and trial record page 1026 pages).

D) Continuous activities of AK.

(1) Defendant A continuously promoted various short-term and periodic activities to maintain interest in AK activities by participants in AK. At each time of performing the following various activities, the participants in AK bank acted in a disturbing manner according to Defendant A’s instructions (Defendant A’s statement in court, Defendant 1029 pages, etc.).

(2) Defendant A presented his image to AK dialogue and carried out a short-term activity that provides the victim’s sexual exploitation video work in the given team 1,50,000, with the victim’s sexual exploitation video work in the given team 150,000, and the participants in AK bank actively responded to the Defendant A’s testimony and trial records (the Defendant A’s court statement, the trial records 1016 pages). The Defendant AK bank games frequently carried out the short-term activity that provides the victim’s sexual exploitation video work in the given team 150,000.

(3) On December 1, 2019, Defendant A promoted events to disclose the name of the minor who contributed to the TV program in which high school students participate, at the time of real-time search 1 on the above LV’s sexual exploitation video products (Defendant A’s legal statement and trial record No. 1028 page), and other participants responded to the event. Of the above, Defendant A searched “LV” and “LV Q Q Q” from around 00 on December 1, 201 to publicize the above event at the other QV group (Defendant A’s suspect interrogation protocol, evidence record No. 3289 page 1289 page).

(4) On December 26, 2019, Defendant A promoted short-term activities to send back for BR by using a graphic called “LW’s defect in military entry”; Defendant A’s arrest, “CO”, and “I am on every occasion at the time when AL is arrested; I am am able to do so; I am am blish, and I am am blish. I am am blish. I am am blish, including Defendant B and Defendant E. I 30 or more amblish participants using AL in accordance with the direction of the above A (Defendant A court statement, two : two 1028 amblish; BR’s prosecutor’s statement, evidence record 11 amblish, evidence record 2673 on April 19, 202; Defendant E on April 23, 2004, evidence record 465 amblish.

(5) After posting a photograph of a number of victims, Defendant A made public the victim’s sexual exploitation video products, which account for the first instance of his personal voting during the voting, or made public the victim’s identity card or posted it on the victim’s name with the victim’s personal identity card, and then made one of them actively participate in the group. Finally, Defendant A promoted more than 10 times the remaining one with a view to enabling the victim to take a detailed attitude that the victim wants, and the participants who won the video products are called as follows: “I go against the victim,” “I go against the victim, I would like to make public the victim’s identity card, or make it open to the victim’s name with the victim’s identity card, or make it open to the victim’s name with the victim’s personal identity card, and make it open to the victim’s ○○.” (The Defendant A’s court record, Defendant 200, 210, 27, 216, 27, 216, 27, 29, 27

(6) Defendant A promoted short-term activities to disclose a victim’s sexual exploitation video recording to the participants in AK bank with the beginning of the victim’s LX and prohibiting the victim from holding the victim’s sexual exploitation, and the participants in AK bank actively held the victim’s insulting remarks (Defendant A’s testimony, Defendant A’s legal statement, 1028, 1029 page).

(7) On December 9, 2019, Defendant A promoted short-term activities with the content that he/she would have a conductor receive 12 marks from “AX” room (Defendant A’s legal statement and trial record page 1321).

(8) In addition, Defendant A also promoted the “CNN” event that BG committed rape against the victim’s CP and the participants in AK were able to ask for the information about the rape process, and the “CNN” event that LYr was tracking AK room, “the winning unit of the date of birth when giving information about theor 100,000 won of the date of birth,” and “the short-term activity that provides AK 100,000 won of support,” and “the one-time order of nanotechnology dancing photograph,” which is called “the one-time order,” which is called “the prosecutor’s office as of April 23, 2020, the evidence record, and the one4568 page of evidence record,” which is also promoted (the Defendant’s prosecution as of April 23, 2020 against the Defendant).

E) Operation and management of Defendant A et al.

(1) Although there was no restriction on the joining and withdrawal from the AKS bank itself, participants in the AS bank, including BN bank, provided their identification cards to Defendant A for the purpose of joining the AS bank. Defendant A, as the synthetic language of 3 to 4 participants (referred to as 'MA' + 'LZ') who are familiar with the use of Q and opened the phone number to the public, Defendant A was posted publicly in the AK bank, etc. (the defendant's testimony at A court, 2 rights 106, 107, 1368 of the trial record, 107, 1368 of the trial record; Defendant A was posted publicly on April 6, 2020, 1039 evidence of evidence.

(2) Defendant A recognized that: (a) Defendant A was a person who actually assisted the AK operation after September 2019 (hereinafter “Defendant A’s court statement, trial record, 1030, 1031 page”) and was in fact assisted by the AK operation (hereinafter “Defendant A”) of the L, BR, Defendant B (the BU bank operation, MaC creation, and AK advertising spathing, etc.).

(3) Defendant A received money from AK participants on the pretext of “support money,” “work-for-the-art welfare fund,” and “admission fee,” and, even if said money was paid, Defendant A indicated that Defendant A would not have any demand to B as a customer (Defendant A’s legal statement and trial record No. 1317 page 1317 page), but not simply receive and sell sexual exploitation video to AK participants, but also made the overall process (the Defendant A expressed as “art to produce sexual exploitation video,” “content,” “content,” etc. in the form of Defendant A and criminal group.

3) Judgment of the court below of first instance

In light of the relevant legal principles, the Defendants asserted to the same effect as the grounds for appeal in the first instance court, and the first instance court, which can be recognized by the evidence duly adopted and investigated, determined that “AK organization” as stated in the judgment, can be sufficiently recognized as a group aimed at committing a crime as stipulated in Article 114 of the Criminal Act.

① Major members of the so-called “AK bank,” which was established in Q, were composed of a large number of specific members, mainly of the members of the so-called “AK bank,” which was established in Q. The main members are the Defendants, AL, BG, BR, etc., and Q from the name weak members, who are clearly identified as “the number of members to the group.”

② The term “AK organization” is an organization in which Defendant A and his accomplice knew that he produced and distributed sexual exploitations by threatening children and juveniles only for the purpose of committing the crime. In particular, even if a group such as an ordinary group, such as a private group, etc., results in the participation in the crime due to a deviation from its representative or a part of its members, it may be regarded as a member of a 'criminal group'. Such a result should be considered as a major factor in the establishment of the concept of 'criminal group'. In light of the fact that the above organization cannot be discovered entirely from the objective of the organization other than the above series of crimes or personal ties among its members, it constitutes a significant factor that can be recognized as a 'criminal group separate from the ordinary group' or 'organization'.

③ All members of the above organization were involved directly or indirectly in the production of sexual exploitation videos, management or publicity of AK Group, Defendant A’s virtual currency profit exchange, and the majority of the members claimed that there was no sharing of roles set forth in the direction of Defendant A. However, as long as Defendants did not perform their roles in the process, the members did not clearly distinguish their roles from each other, it cannot be said that the above members did not act in accordance with the division of roles.

④ Most of the members of the above organization participated in the " Q Q" AK established by Defendant A, and the Defendant participated in a small group, such as the "BE" or "BF", which was established only by the principal members of the organization or those who paid virtual currency to himself/herself. Through this, Defendant A identified and confirmed the organization members, and this became a prerequisite for repeated criminal acts as follows.

⑤ Since around September 2019, the name of “ Q Q” bank established by Defendant A was changed and its name was continuously created and closed, but all of the above rooms were the same as the fact that Defendant A distributed sexual exploitations made by Defendant A and the relevant participants followed Defendant A and followed the instructions. In that process, the above members of the organization maintained a similar role and status as a substitute, and even if some of the members were to withdraw or be arrested or to take a new part in the middle, the above organizational identity was maintained as it was.

6) The Defendants asserted to the effect that since the last purpose of the Defendant A following the crime of sexual exploitation stated in the judgment was money, only acquired virtual currency from its members and did not use it for producing sexual exploitation. The above organization members merely belong to different objects in order for the Defendant A to achieve his own purpose, and thus, they cannot be viewed as one crime group, and even if the Defendant alone could sufficiently commit the crime, characteristics as a crime group are weak. However, in order to acquire money for the purpose of each crime, the Defendant A must induce the victims, and produce sexual exploitations for the induced victims, and it should be known that there were many people interested in the production of virtual currency, and some of them should be provided for consideration to the Defendant A with virtual exploitation, etc., and it should not be readily accepted as a series of motive for the Defendant to directly participate in the crime of sexual exploitation and exchange money to the Defendant, even if the members did not directly use the virtual currency for the purpose of the crime of this case.

4) Determination of the immediate deliberation

In light of the above facts as revealed by the court below and the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, it is determined that Defendant A implemented a grade system based on experience points (XP) using the management function of “BH” from “T” to “BH”, and Defendant A was established a small group room, such as “BE” outside AP bank, actively promote AK and systematically manage AK while engaging in various events and activities. On September 2019, Defendant A, AL, LD, etc., a crime group for the purpose of jointly promoting the production and distribution of child and juvenile pornography while sharing a specific number of people, such as Defendant A, AL, and LD, were already established, and such crime group was maintained until March 2020, when Defendant A was arrested.

A) As to the formation of a "criminal group"

(1) a series of specific persons with common purposes;

① AL refers to a person who approaches Defendant A to commit a crime of producing a similar sexual exploitation video product produced by Defendant A in the AF bank after taking the sexual exploitation video product produced by Defendant A at the AF bank, and explains that “D is a video product produced by Defendant A from AO to AK for a considerable amount of time on September 2019, and Defendant A is also a person who actively supported the production and distribution of sexual exploitation video product produced by Defendant A and obtained a manager’s authority to operate AK bank.

② The AL and LD decided that Defendant A will voluntarily manage Defendant A and AK bank beyond simply viewing sexual exploitation video works that Defendant A put in place in the AK room. Defendant A granted management authority, and endeavored to manage AK by demotion due to a bad participant's demotion, etc., and Defendant A actively participated in AK publicity or AK event, etc. by facilitating other participants' participation in AK hosting, etc., and Defendant A continuously maintained the motive for the production of sexual exploitation video works and indirectly created profits of Defendant A through this.

③ Defendant A was released from the AF bank and was actually using the AK bank as an advertisement and sales channel for the sexual exploitation video works, and AL and DoD also managed it under the contact with Defendant A while being aware that the location where Defendant A’s sexual exploitation video works are accessible to AK. Thus, it is reasonable to deem that AL and DoD had the purpose of producing sexual exploitation video works as well as the distribution purpose of sexual exploitation video works. In other words, AK bank is a space for sharing and distributing sexual exploitation video works and for inducing and inducing its operators or managers to produce such works. It can be sufficiently recognized that it has the purpose of production.

④ Although joining and withdrawing from AK bank are free due to the nature of Q Group bank, it is sufficient to view that Defendant A continued combination with them for the purpose of common use. However, even if Defendant A had been granted the relevant manager’s authority from the time of operation of AO, and thereafter another AK bank was created and operated, Defendant A continued to manage it from August 2019 to the Haman on September 2019.

⑤ In withdrawing criminal proceeds from virtual currency received by Defendant A, it is unclear whether Defendant A received money from Defendant A in addition to the amount prescribed as transportation expenses. LD appears to have not received criminal proceeds from Defendant A (the purport that Defendant A does not divide criminal proceeds into other criminal group members). However, it is only one proviso to determine whether Defendant A’s criminal proceeds have been distributed to other criminal group members, and it does not constitute the requisite for establishing a criminal group in itself, as seen earlier, insofar as Defendant A’s management officers, including Defendant A, form a continuously combined body with common criminal purposes. However, the circumstance in which criminal proceeds have not been distributed does not affect the establishment of a criminal group.

(2) Allocation of roles and organizational structure of members

① Defendant A accessed victims by advertising SNS terms and conditions, etc., and continuously led the production and distribution of sexual exploitation video works by setting the method of distributing such video works.

② Since AO, AL established and managed BH in AK. While Defendant A used BH function in AF bank reasonably thought, Defendant A also did not use the method of using BH function even though Defendant A wanted to use it, Defendant A was required to open a new AK as “AO” bank actually flows out due to an error in BH function. BH function is continuously used for AK operation by sending personnel horses to participants and granting experience (XP). Accordingly, it appears that the role of BH appears to have contributed to maintaining the activation of AK room and raising interest in sexual exploitation video works. In full view of the fact that BH function was introduced in another name thereafter, Defendant AK’s act of managing B in B is deemed to have been an act of producing and distributing sexual exploitation video works.

③ In addition, in accordance with the direction of Defendant A, if the participants did not set up a protopy photograph or did not disclose Q’s last connection time, the participants were forced at one time or two times a week to set aside the atmosphere, or forced the participants to set up and manage the AK. These management activities ultimately contributed to the maintenance of the AK bank, which is the medium for selling and distributing sexual exploitation video products, and inducing the continuous interest of the consumers of sexual exploitation. Meanwhile, AL also managed the participants by paying experience values (XP) to the participants as determined by Defendant A.

④ In addition, the promotional activities, such as Defendant A, AL, and LD’s 1st achievement event, ultimately led to forming a kind of ‘sexual exploitation culture, which allows users or participants of the group to participate in the production and distribution of sexual exploitation video works in a natural way, by taking the criminal act of sexual exploitation into entertainment as a place for entertainment. Such a malicious culture has contributed to the formation, maintenance, and continuation of the AK branch organization as a “group for the production and distribution of sexual exploitation video works.”

B) As to the maintenance and continuation of a crime group

(1) a series of specific persons with common purposes;

① Even after the formation of the combination of Defendant A with the AL, LD, etc., the “AK organization” combines the members who had engaged in repeated activities in the AK as well as the Defendants, as the Defendants, even after the formation of the combination with the Defendant A’s body. Such “specific multiple persons” have committed various active acts for the existence and maintenance of the criminal group by means of advertising with the victim, personal information inquiry, production of sexual exploitation video works, production of offline sexual crimes, and distribution of sexual exploitation video works.

② In light of the fact that Defendant A had induced multiple women including children and juveniles, and distributed and shared sexual exploitation video works, and had been created for the purpose of obtaining monetary benefits by attracting participants in the process. Defendant A’s sexual exploitation video works produced by Defendant A could be easily seen by any participant that they were not produced with the consent of the victims when examining the content and production process. It was divided between the members of the AK branch by informing each other of the know-how to avoid detection by investigative agencies, Q & use method, and usage method outside the trace, and it was discussed how the police investigation or control was conducted at the MD branch created by the Defendant A, and it was discussed how the members of the AK branch would be conducted at the time of regulating these members, and that Defendant A’s act of producing and distributing sexual exploitation video works and various acts conducted by the participants in the AK at the time of their production and distribution of video works at the time of their production and distribution, Defendant A’s act of distributing them at the time of 10G 200 witness rights to public trial was not permitted.

③ From September 2019 to March 2020, the AK bank continued to engage in creation and abolition while changing its name from around September 2019 to around March 202. The small group bank established to actively communicate among the minority members, such as “BE” and “BF,” also has some cases of withdrawal from or arresting or new participation in the middle. However, the organization identity of producing and distributing sexual exploitation video products to victims, and the essential aspect that the AK bank participants engaged in producing and distributing sexual exploitation products, and comply with the direction was continuously maintained.

④ The part of the procedure for joining and withdrawing an organization is only a device to secure the continuity of a group members, and it does not constitute a criminal group in itself. However, even though there was no special restriction on joining and withdrawing from the AK bank, if a member who acts in the 'BE', etc. becomes aware of contact or has come to be out of contact, the defendant A personally contacted and led him to contact, and the defendant A started to demand the same procedure as the certification procedure for joining a small group immediately before the defendant is arrested by the investigation agency. Furthermore, the AK participant sent his identification card, etc. to the defendant A was able to withdraw by taking a retaliation against the fear of disclosure of his personal name and withdrawal as the part of the 's member', and the defendant A also was aware that the participant who sent his identification card was aware of the above fear or potential fear of fear of fear of being disclosed to the public and the withdrawal.

(2) Allocation of roles and organizational structure of members

① As stated in the facts constituting a crime in the judgment of the court below, the members of the AK bank organization divided the roles of inducing victims, personal information inquiries, production of sexual exploitation video works, ex officio sex offenses and the distribution of sexual exploitation video works, etc. In particular, during the course of committing a crime, the Defendant A continued to contribute to the operation (such as sponsor advertising, drug advertising, exchange and delivery of criminal proceeds, offline rape, etc.), Defendant A without ability to carry out such activities (personal information inquiry), Defendant A mobilized activities (personal information distribution of sex exploitation video works, etc.) with high efficiency in committing a crime, and continued to commit a crime by mobilization of the AK members of the AK bank organization (a court statement, Defendant 2 rights of public trial records, page 982).

② From September 2018 to August 2019, Defendant A, alone, committed a sexual exploitation video production, etc., against five victims during one year from around September 2018. However, in operating AK, more than 70 victims were produced for six months until they are arrested in around March 2020. As such, it is reasonable to view that Defendant A’s own act was based on the organizational act of the above crime group. Defendant A actively operated AK from October 2019 to August 2, 2019, and this was the most active participation of the members of AL, B, B,G, Defendant D, E, F, and CG (GCH)’s program and the aforementioned active participation of the members of AK in the operation of AK, including but not limited to the degree of “Defendant A’s active participation in the operation of AK,” as the above active participation of the members of AK in the operation of AK. Even if there was no statement between Defendant A and the members of A1, as the above active participation in the operation of AK.

5) Sub-committee

Therefore, at least on September 2019, 'AK', which is a medium in which Defendant A distributed a sexual exploitation video product, began to be systematically managed by having a systematic system and structure that allows Defendant A to repeatedly and repeatedly commit a crime centered on a small group. Since this was continuously divided into multiple groups, Defendant A, A, and LD, it is reasonable to view that the crime group for the purpose of producing and distributing child and juvenile pornography was formed on September 201, and the crime group organized as such continues to exist and maintained until March 2020.

The judgment of the court of first instance that recognized the "criminal group" of the "AK Organization" is fully acceptable (However, the part of the judgment of the court of first instance that, with the defendant A and AL, organized the criminal group "AK Organization (one name CA)" to commit a crime, such as "influence to the group of "BE" with the defendant A and "BE" with the defendant A and "BE", is not sufficiently supported by the evidence, and therefore, is not appropriate).

Accordingly, Defendants and their defense counsels do not accept the assertion to the effect that Defendant A produced and distributed a sexual exploitation video in collaboration with Defendant A alone or AL and did not form a criminal group, or that Defendants, other than Defendant A, were members of the above criminal group after September 2019.

B. Judgment on Defendant A’s assertion

1) Of the judgment of the first instance court, concerning the violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (similar act) and the violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (Rape)

A) Relevant legal principles

In the case of rape, violence or intimidation must be such an extent as to make it considerably difficult to resist the victim’s resistance. Whether such violence or intimidation was significantly difficult to resist the victim ought to be determined by comprehensively taking account of the following: (a) the content and degree of the relevant assault and intimidation exercising tangible power; (b) the developments leading up to exercising force; (c) the background leading up to exercising force; (d) the relationship with the victim; and (e) the circumstances at the time of committing the crime (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2000Do1914, Aug. 18, 200; 2016Do16948, Oct. 10, 12, 2017).

When a court examines a sexual assault or sexual harassment case, it shall pay attention not to lose gender-sensitive assumption so as to understand the issue of gender discrimination in the context of the case and realize gender equality. In particular, the aspects to cope with sexual assault victims are bound to vary depending on the victim’s gender status, relationship with the perpetrator, and specific circumstances. As such, special circumstances where the victim of sexual assault is faced with, should be sufficiently taken into account in individual and specific cases. Whether there was assault and intimidation by the perpetrator to establish the crime of rape should be determined based on the specific circumstances in which the victim was faced at the time of sexual intercourse, taking into account not only the content and degree of the assault and intimidation, but also the background leading up to exercising force, the relationship with the victim, and the sexual intercourse at the time of sexual intercourse, and the circumstance that the victim was unable to deviate from the scene of the crime before sexual intercourse, or the victim did not resist with the intent of the victim, thereby making it difficult for the perpetrator to resist the victim (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2018Do7978, Jul. 27, 2018).

A sex offense against a victim shall be determined as a substantive concurrent crime under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act by comprehensively taking into account all the circumstances, such as the method, time, place, and the identity and continuity of the criminal (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 87Do694, May 12, 1987; 96Do1763, Sept. 6, 1996). In cases where a criminal repeats similar rape and rape with regard to “the victim who was unable or considerably difficult to resist due to the same assault and intimidation” with regard to “the victim who was unable or considerably difficult to resist due to such assault and intimidation,” when the act of rape was committed with a single and continuous criminal intent during a series of processes for rape and when it is assessed as identical legal interests, it is established only for the crime of rape, and it does not constitute a separate crime by absorbing the act of rape (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2014Do17372, Mar. 12, 2015).

B) the facts of recognition

According to the court below's adopted and examined evidence, the following facts can be acknowledged.

(1) On Oct. 1, 2019, Defendant A saw to the effect that he would reduce the amount of KRW 5 million to the victim who is a minor by using the first Posing Posing Posing Posing Posing Posing Posing Posing Posing Posing Posing Posing Posing Posing Posing Posing Posing Posing Posing Posing Posing Posing Pos Pos Pos Pos Pos Pos 200,000 to the victim’s CP.

(2) Defendant A expressed to the victim’s CP who asked the victim whether he will know money later or not to do so and to the effect that he would not talk about how he will send his employee (the witness’s CP’s legal statement, 2020 high Gohap294 trial records (the first instance trial records)).

(3) On October 5, 2019, the victim CP moved BG sent by the defendant to the parking lot of the DC elementary school before the CZ branch located in Bupyeongcheon-si. Under the direction of the defendant A, BG and the victim CP were affixed to the front seat of the vehicle, and the victim CP was removed from the upper half of the CP, etc., and then the victim CPU BG’s sexual flag was cut down by moving the back seat to the back seat, and the victim CP BG took a photograph of the front seat of the CPU BG’s sexual flag, and the victim CP’s fingers were recorded into the back seat part of the CP’s sound and the part of the CP’s port (the defendant A was the prosecution No. 7 of April 3, 2020, the suspect interrogation protocol, the evidence record No. 999-110-113 pages).

(4) 피고인 A은 피해자 CP이 집에 들어갈 시간이 다 되어가자 BG에게 성관계를 한 후 피해자 CP을 집으로 돌려보내라고 지시하였다. 그러나 피고인 A은 수사기관에 출석하여 그에 대해 "실패한 것으로 알고 있다. 발기가 실패하여 시늉이라도 하는 영상을 찍으라고 했다"는 취지로 진술하였다(피고인 A에 대한 2020. 4. 3.자 검찰 제7회 피의자신문조서, 증거기록 9권 1114, 1115면).

(5) BG acted at the investigative agency mainly in accordance with the direction of Defendant A, and made the victim “AK, I will audit at the request of Defendant A,” and stated that “AK, I will take pictures of the victim’s expression “AK, I will audit,” and “AK, I will take pictures of the victim’s 10th volume,” and the victim stated that the victim’s CP was recorded (the prosecutor’s office of April 3, 2020, the evidence record, the evidence record, the evidence record, the evidence record, the evidence record, the evidence record, and the record of the victim’s CP).

(6) Defendant A made a statement at an investigative agency that “the reason under the direction of the Defendant was that the CP would give money to the Defendant, but it was the sexual scam that he had already managed, and thus, it was well aware of the direction.” Defendant A also made a statement to the effect that “The request for a photograph of the graduate scambling to confirm whether the principal and the account were in question. It appears that the purpose is to continuously identify the name of the female scam and use it as a means of intimidation to receive a transmission of sexual scams.” The prosecutor’s question of “4. It is called “I will comply with it,” and “I will first plan to receive a transmission of the video by giving the players scambling in the manner of giving the female scams (victims CP).” In fact, Defendant A also made a statement to the effect that “I would have scamed the victim’s CP as if they were scam scamed to the victim (Defendant A).

C) Determination

(1) Whether the sexual relation between the victim's CP and BG was caused by Defendant A's intimidation

In full view of the following circumstances such as the contents, degree and circumstance of intimidation by Defendant A and the victim, relationship between Defendant A and the victim, and circumstances at the time of the crime, it is determined that the above sexual relationship between the victim CP and the BG was made by the victim’s intimidation to the extent that it would make it considerably difficult for the victim to resist. The assertion of Defendant A and his defense counsel against this is rejected.

① The victim CP saw that Defendant A was aware of how he was aware of the 'the CP’, and Defendant A was aware of the fact that she was frighting to the victim’s CP. Based on the CP, Defendant A used the CP to spread BG.

② Various acts ordered by Defendant A and BG to the victim is not a nature or degree of voluntary implementation solely on the ground that the victim’s CP simply promised to receive a certain amount of money for payment. The victim’s CP committed a crime due to violence, etc. exercised by BG.

③ As alleged by Defendant A and his defense counsel, the victim CP himself designated the location of BG and the delivery date by taking into account the interest of the victim’s home, and notified the victim’s personal location (elementary school parking lot) in his neighborhood, and even if the victim confirmed that “the money was paid to Defendant A at any time after the sex relationship with BG,” it is not incompatible with the sex relationship by Defendant A’s intimidation, but rather, the victim CP had no choice but to follow the Defendant’s direction because the victim’s personal body and video was threatened by Defendant A, and the victim’s threat was made as if they were disseminated.

(2) Whether the crime of violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (similar act) against the victim's CP is added to the subsequent violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (Rape)

In addition to various circumstances that can be seen by adding the evidence adopted and examined by the court below and this court in the facts of recognition (the act of similarity and the means and method of rape pursuant to the instruction of the defendant A, the process before and after the crime, the criminal method of the defendant A, the method of the crime committed by the defendant A, and the process that the victim A and the BG engaged in the act in succession with the order of the defendant A), although the crime of similar rape against the victim Gap and BG against the victim's CP was committed at a close time in a similar place, it is reasonable to regard the crime of similar rape as a separate crime, not a single crime under the single and continuous criminal committed in a series of processes for rape, but a separate crime under the separate criminal intent. Accordingly, the defendant A and his defense counsel are not accepted.

① In general, “Rape by sexual intercourse through the inserting of a sexual organ’s sexual organ” and “similar sexual intercourse, which puts a sexual organ into a body other than a sexual organ or into a part of a body or an instrument other than a sexual organ, cannot be deemed as a relation naturally or normally accompanying or absorption between themselves. In particular, in this case, BG entered the victim to make the victim prompt, puts the victim’s sexual organ into the victim’s sound and anus, and there is no material to deem that such act was separate from the sexual intercourse (Rape) performed thereafter, and that all such acts were planned to be conducted together from the beginning.

② When Defendant A photographs various sexual exploitation videos against the victims, rather than focusing on the sexual intercourse between the victims and other males or the sexual behavior itself, the victims have taken a place to the AK participants by creating a sense of personal reproduction. Considering that, the images that Defendant A sought to take by mobilization of the victim’s CP and BG do not ultimately appear to have been rapes between the victim’s CP and BG.

③ Defendant A, according to Defendant A’s instructions, committed each sexual act. Afterward, Defendant A received the result of wishing to engage in a similar act, and instructed Defendant A to engage in a sexual intercourse again by telephone, and BG intended to engage in an attempted rape by sucking with a driver’s seat according to that instruction. As such, Defendant A, upon individual and specific instruction, appears to have obtained each individual act and the result of such act, even more than the final rape itself.

2) As to the part of the judgment of the court below of second instance concerning coercion, such as emergency photographing of victim GV

A) Facts of recognition

(1) On September 17, 2019, Defendant A received bals and bals from the victim GV to contact with the content of “the finding of a woman seeking salphones,” and on September 18, 2019, Defendant A was informed of the fact that Defendant A distributed the above pictures and images from “ME” to “ME” on September 18, 2019, and was omitted in a extreme fear (the police statement from September 18, 2019, 2021No236 evidence records, 8, 37,38; the prosecutor’s statement from June 3, 2020, 202No1236, 40, 41).

(2) On September 18, 2019, the victim GV sent the Defendant’s photograph and image to Defendant A, and it was considered how there was a CB message and a caps with which his photograph and image are disseminated. Defendant A “GV sent the ice digging to the stringer and the stringer of the stringer and the stringer of the stringer, and the stringer to the CB. From now on, the 2019.” However, ME sent the victim GV’s photograph and image to the police without considering the victim GV’s face, and Defendant A sent the victim GV a phone (the victim GV’s statement, the prosecutor’s protocol on June 3, 2020, the right to evidence evidence No. 20236, 41, 424).

(3) The victim GV received Defendant A’s Q phone from the emergency exit of the company. As the sound is sound, Defendant A suspected that the victim GV was in the police station, and “I would open the four face without cancelling the report, and spread the photograph and image to the public.” Accordingly, the victim GV sent a photograph to confirm that the victim GV was not the police station, and that the present location is not the police station. Accordingly, the victim GV sent the Defendant’s non-permanent photograph and sent it to the Defendant (the prosecutor’s statement of June 3, 2020 against the victim GV, 2021No236, 12, 42 pages).

(4) 피해자 GV은 이후 ME에게 '영상을 다 지우지 않으면 경찰에 에 신고해서 법적 조치를 취할 예정'이라고 말하는 영상을 찍어 보내며 이를 Q 그룹방에 올려 달라고 부탁하였고, 이를 본 피고인 A은 다시 피해자 GV에게 연락하여 "'오지랖 부리지 마세요'라고 말하는 영상, 'AK 인증합니다'라고 말하는 영상을 찍어서 보내지 않으면, 계속네 사진과 영상을 유포하겠다"고 하여, 피해자 GV은 회사 화장실에서 피고인 A의 요구대로 찍은 영상을 피고인 A에게 전송하였다(피해자 GV에 대한 2020. 6. 3.자 검찰 진술조서, 2021노236 증거기록 12권, 42면; 피해자 GV 강요 피해영상, 2021노236 증거기록 12권 17319면 첨부 CD).

(5) On September 18, 2019, the victim GV was present at the prosecutor’s office and stated to the effect that “No photograph and image was sent to Defendant A by receiving intimidation from Defendant A, but no photograph and image was thereafter made,” (the victim GV’s written statement by the prosecutor’s office on June 3, 2020, the evidence record No. 2021No236, 43 pages).

B) Determination

Defendant A had a similar assertion in the first instance court, and the second instance court determined that the intimidation or coercion against the victim was recognized on the grounds as stated in its reasoning.

In full view of the following circumstances: (a) the victim GV was found to have known that the above facts were revealed in addition to the evidence adopted and examined by the court below and this court; (b) the victim GV was distributed to many and unspecified persons; (c) the Defendant knew of this fact, thereby allowing the victim to take photographs of an emergency device; and (d) the victim GV had the victim take photographs of an emergency device without complying with the victim GV’s oral statement; and (e) there was no reason to have sent the Defendant A by affixing an emergency device, if the victim GV was not threatened, it can be sufficiently recognized that the victim GV did not have any duty to send a photograph by Defendant A’s intimidation.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is just, and the defendant A and his defense counsel's assertion on different premise is not accepted.

3) As to the part of the judgment of the court below in the second instance on the coercion of the victim (KZ)

A) Facts of recognition

(1) On October 28, 2019, the victim (KZ) sought a large amount of eggs in order to punish money, and contacted theCC with the advertisement containing the “EF”. The defendant A, who used the said Addi, made a link to the victim (KZ) with the phone using the separate name of the “MF”. The victim (KZ) notified another 'MG' used by himself/herself of the other 'MG'. After then, the victim (KZ) sent the balm pictures and identification pictures, etc. affixed to the defendant A on October 28, 2019, the police record on October 28, 2019, the police record on the victim (KZ), the evidence record on the right to use 136No10-10-18-10-10 of the evidence.

(2) Defendant A, upon transmission of balkic photo, threatened the victim (KZ) to spread the balkic photo and personal information on the Internet unless the victim does not have the victim's balkic balkic balkic balkic balkic balkic balkic balkic balkic balkic balkic balkic balkic balkic balkic balkic balkic balkic balkic balkic balkic balkic balkic balkic balkic b.

(3) In the above process, the victim (Z) transmitted the total of 43 photographs and videos. The victim (KZ) appeared at the investigative agency after October 28, 2019, and then transmitted without intimidation from 1 to 35 files. The victim stated that the images from 36m from 12:01 to 13:10 on the same day were taken by intimidation (the victim (KZ) were taken by intimidation (the victim’s second statement of the police on July 1, 2020, the victim’s right to record 11, and 78m).

(4) On the other hand, at around 08:44 on October 28, 2019, the victim (KZ) sent to Defendant A a photograph containing only the victim’s identification card alone, and at around 13:10 on the same day, the victim’s photograph citing his/her identification card to his/her hand and sent his/her face to Defendant A [the victim’s report (KZ)] (Attachment to the victim’s report(s) and the file CD on the list of crimes), 2021No236 evidence, 11, 99 pages].

(5) On October 28, 2019, the injured party (KZ) failed to photograph the images any longer to Defendant A. Accordingly, Defendant A instructed the injured party (KZ) to put an article on the Internet to publicize the sale of narcotics, and the injured party (KZ) puts the phrase “FC” into the “FC”, “FC”, “PEH” into the state of being aware that it was illegal (the victim (KE)’s second statement of the police on July 1, 2020, the evidence record No. 2021No236, the evidence record No. 11, 79 pages).

B) Determination

In the first instance court, Defendant A made a similar assertion with this part, and the second instance court determined that there was intimidation or coercion against the victim for the same reason as the judgment in its holding.

In full view of the following circumstances that can be revealed by adding up the evidence adopted and examined by the court below and by this court, the victim (KE) was found to have taken a photograph by putting his/her identification card around 13:10 on October 28, 2019 by Defendant A’s intimidation. The judgment of the court below is just, and the defendant’s assertion that there was no intimidation against the victim (KZ) is not accepted.

① Defendant A asserts to the effect that “the identification card cannot be deemed to have been received by intimidation,” but the victim (KZ) sent a photograph containing only the identification card on October 28, 2019 on one occasion at around 08:44, and then sent a photograph bearing only the identification card to Defendant A at around 13:10, the same day after the date when the intimidation was commenced by Defendant A, and sent a photograph showing the face to Defendant A. Therefore, in the case of the above identification card, it is probable to deem that the above identification card conforms to the developments explained by Defendant A, but it is difficult to view it as such in the case of an additional transmission of identification card and face.

② The injured party (KZ) stated that 35 of the 43 files sent by the injured party to the Defendant A was not by intimidation, and only eight of the files subsequent to the commencement of intimidation was made by intimidation. In full view of the time when each photograph and video was taken, the contents of each image, the attitude the injured party (KZ) took before and after the image, the injured party’s statement on the commencement of intimidation in this part is credibility.

③ In addition, if Defendant A’s intimidation was not a threat, there is no reason to bring the victim’s face back to the sales text of narcotics, and the victim’s photograph, showing identification card and face, is almost the last photograph sent to Defendant A. Thus, it is probable that the relevant photograph would be stamped against his will after Defendant A’s intimidation began.

4) Of the judgment below of the second instance, as to indecent act by force against the victim (LA) and similar rape

A) Facts of recognition

(1) On February 25, 2020, the victim (LA) was proposed to talk with the victim (LA) from the CL using "MJ" as the clinic and to give 4-6 million won per month to the sexual intercourse. The victim (LA) considered the victim as the victim "MK, known to the CL after February 29, 2020," "MJ" and had the victim contact with the victim (LA) by March 3, 2020. The defendant was required to verify whether the victim (LA) was the victim (LA), the police officer's refusal to do so, and the victim (LA)'s statement to the effect that the victim (LA) was 201.6 billion won per month to 4-6 million won per month, and the victim (LA), the victim (LA) took 2016.36 billion won to the victim (MJ) evidence and evidence 201.61.65 billion won to the victim (LA) 20165.61.67

(2) On March 4, 2020, Defendant A, who received the above images and photographs, sent to the victim (LA) the Internet activities, etc. of the victim (LA) and sent them to the victim (LA) for a well-known statement, and the victim (LA) began to threaten the victim (LA) with the same content as the victim (LA) if the victim is well-known in the oral statement. The victim (LA) then sent 45 video images and screen pictures to the victim (as of March 4, 2020, around June 8, 2020, police records of 2021No236 evidence of 1637, 1638, 1638, 206, 206, 2016).

(3) On March 4, 2020, the victim (LA) moved from AK's staff to 'MO' 'MO' in front of the ML Station around the GL basin, and taken a detailed attitude, such as: (a) taking a water-saving machine and crym crym crym crym crym hym hym hym hym hym hym hym hym hym hym hym hym hym hym hym hym hym hym hym hym hym hym hym hym hym hym hym hym hym hym hym

(4) On March 5, 2020, at around 01:50, the injured party (LA) continued to enter MN’s sexual organ as soon as possible, and MN photographs it in video and transmitted it to the Defendant through Q (LA) (the police protocol of June 8, 2020 against the injured party (LA), the police protocol of June 8, 2020 against the injured party (LA), the 2021No236 evidence record of 11,6740 pages.

(5) The victim (LA) considered that the male (MN) who was met at an investigative agency was only acting in accordance with the direction of the defendant A. The victim stated that "A is bound to follow the direction of the defendant A to keep the image unsatisfy so long as I do not take place." "At the point of view, A was in the storage of several hundreds of images, and it was too difficult for A to keep the image at the time of their display, but it was now unsatisfy so long, in order to keep it unsatisfy, there was no choice but to have it unsatisfy, and it was too difficult to see that there was too little number of people who might not die only within the motherel," "B was already subject to intimidation," "B was already subject to intimidation, and on the same date, I stated that A was forced to keep the record of the defendant's testimony from 261 to 261, and that the act of the victim was also forced by the police 261 to 2616's.27.

B) Determination

In full view of the above facts, the victim (LA) can sufficiently recognize the fact that the victim (LA) was forced to commit indecent act by force and rape by MN, from the part of the defendant (LA) in a fear due to intimidation that the victim would spread the "video of the defendant A" and was unable to resist due to the defendant A's refusal to resist. The defendant A and his defense counsel's assertion that there was no causation between the defendant A's intimidation, indecent act by force, or similar rape, or the victim (LA) did not have to resist due to the defendant A's intimidation is rejected.

5) As to the part of the lower judgment on the assertion of illegally collected evidence as to the possession of child and juvenile pornography

Defendant A and his defense counsel’s assertion is that: (a) based on the search and seizure warrant issued to Defendant A for a child or juvenile pornography production and distribution suspicion that “the Defendant produced and distributed sexual exploitation materials led by the Defendant A,” the investigative agency’s search and seizure of electronic information related to the facts of the possession of child or juvenile pornography is illegal; (b) without any separate search and seizure warrant; (c) the investigation agency’s search and seizure warrant is unlawful; (d) however, in full view of the assertion itself and the facts of each suspected charge recognized in the instant case, the investigation subject, and the investigation circumstances, etc., the two suspected crimes are deemed to exist; (c) thus, the investigation agency’s search and seizure warrant based on the search and seizure warrant issued to Defendant A cannot be deemed to be illegal evidence collection.

In addition, Defendant A asserts that even if the investigative agency newly issued a warrant in relation to the facts of Defendant A’s possession of child or juvenile pornography, the search by the preceding warrant is illegal. However, the issuance of a new warrant by the investigative agency is only the lawful re-issuance of evidence obtained by the search based on the existing warrant, and it does not constitute a basis for the illegality of the evidence acquired prior to that time. Accordingly, Defendant A and his defense counsel’s assertion cannot be accepted.

C. Determination on the assertion regarding Defendant B’s crime of joining a criminal organization

1) Facts of recognition

According to the court below's adopted and examined evidence, the following facts can be acknowledged.

A) On September 12, 2019, Defendant B subscribed to the “HR” room as an undisclosed, and changed to “B Q,” around October 2019. Defendant A started active activities at AK from the time when he/she participated in the recruitment of “M Q,” around November 14, 2019, and started active activities at AK from the time when he/she was arrested by an investigative agency on February 9, 2020 (the suspect interrogation protocol, evidence-related evidence-related interrogation protocol, 17 rights, 6474, 6475, 648 pages).

B) On November 1, 2019, Defendant B served as a manager with the authority of managing the “BU,” which was operated by Defendant A, as a manager of the “BU,” group, and thereafter recruited AK bank participants in the short term as a manager of AK bank. According to Defendant A’s instructions, Defendant A actively participated in events, etc. using a super-connection, etc., promoting AK bank and entering LV into the order of real-time search (the prosecutor’s interrogation protocol, evidence record Nos. 6476, 648, 6492, 6494, 6496, 6496, on June 12, 2020 against Defendant B), and Defendant A testified to the effect that Defendant B performed the role of AL on behalf of Defendant B, after arresting Defendant A.

C) Even after Defendant B continued to serve as AK manager, Defendant B operated AK room, such as “MC,” and distributed a considerable amount of sexual exploitation video on his own to AK room (Defendant B’s interrogation protocol of the prosecution as of June 12, 2020 and evidence record 17 pages 6517).

D) After the participation in AK, Defendant B stated that he participated in AK activities under the premise that he was aware that the act of Defendant A and her failure distance, rape, etc. committed by a participant in AK is an illegal act, and in detail, he has been thought that he could be a criminal group. The crime itself is an organized group, he was in charge of division of roles, and he thought that he is a criminal group, but he was able to be a criminal group, and that he temporarily or temporarily participate in such a crime group is likely to be a criminal group. (C) On June 12, 2020, Defendant B stated that “I think that he may be a criminal group,” and that “I think that he may be a criminal group.” (C) On June 12, 2020, prosecutorial record of suspect interrogation right, evidence interrogation right, 6484, 6504, 650, 6502, 650,6502).

2) Determination

As seen below, Defendant B, while performing the manager of AK from November 2019 to Defendant AK, demanded victims to take a specific attitude when producing sexual exploitation video works, actively contributed to the operation of AK bank by actively distributing sexual exploitation video works to various AK banks, and Defendant A knowingly committed the above active act and participated in the crime in accordance with Defendant A’s instructions, etc., even though he was aware that Defendant A was committing a crime through multiple instructions, in light of the legal principles as to the joining of the crime group and its activities, Defendant B’s series of acts, such as the management of AK bank and the distribution of sexual exploitation video works, etc., were committed in concert with the crime group of AK bank organization, and were committed based on organizational decision-making after participating as a member, and did not affect the joining and maintenance of AK relief staff (and in this process, even if Defendant B was aware that he was aware of some of his activities or activities by his own members, it does not affect the aforementioned crime).

Therefore, the defendant's assertion against this is rejected.

D. Determination as to Defendant C’s assertion

1) Of the judgment of the court below of first instance, regarding the part concerning the defendant C's joining and activities of the criminal organization

A) Facts of recognition

According to the court below's adopted and examined evidence, the following facts can be acknowledged.

(1) Defendant A stated in the court that Defendant C was a person in charge of the role of spreading a victim’s incentive advertisement, exchanging proceeds of crime, and inquiring about personal information (Defendant A’s statement in court and 1033 pages of trial record).

(2) On November 25, 2019, Defendant C posted a HM press report on AK at the Internet portal site CX mail on the Internet portal site on November 25, 2019, and the image of the article became accurately known as to what kind of work Defendant A had been performed by the same sphone advertising as that of Defendant A’s instructions; “AK and first divided conversations around October 5, 2019, but it was sick like a large group of group AK’s group,” and “AK’s instructions were given only in the middle of a group of children and juveniles,” but it was assumed that Defendant C had been aware of the same 10 days of retaliation against Defendant C’s 2, 2019, including that it was another 9 days of retaliation against Defendant C, and that Defendant C’s 16th statement was made to the effect that Defendant C had been made to the effect that it was 106 of the evidence that it was an accomplice’s 16th day of testimony.

(3) Defendant C sent to Defendant A a code of "1" in Q message on the date of arrest. According to Defendant A’s statement, the message of “1” appears to have been committed in a way corresponding to the occurrence of an emergency of the withdrawal books in the Bophishing crime (the crime committed between Defendant C and the Defendant on March 27, 2020) due to special relation to the crime committed between Defendant C and the Defendant on March 27, 2020 (the second interrogation protocol of Defendant A by the Prosecutor’s Office No. 9, evidence record No. 774 page).

(4) Defendant A also notified Defendant C of the purport that he was “AK” on December 30, 2019, and “AK has the ability to call”. Specifically, as a result of digital sirening of C’s mobile phone, Defendant A sent an article to Defendant C on November 25, 2019, and Defendant A knew of HM media’s resident number. 'Isskyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy, whether the headquarters of the PM press was a specialized Chinese head office for four consecutive days.

(5) Even after the above Q dialogue, Defendant C posted an advertisement writing, etc. on the Internet in accordance with Defendant A’s instructions, and attempted to withdraw money relating to the AK’s operating profit. On December 31, 2019, Defendant C was arrested by the investigation agency (Defendant A’s legal statement and trial record 1378 pages).

B) Determination

In light of the legal principles as seen earlier, even if the above facts are revealed in addition to the evidence adopted and examined by the court below and this court, a series of acts, such as withdrawal of Defendant AK revenue, etc., by Defendant C, such acts, such as withdrawal, even if they did not directly participate in the AK bank, shall be deemed to be acts aimed at maintaining and maintaining the existence of a crime group based on the organizational decision-making of the crime group as a member of the AK bank organization in concert with the AK bank organization and aiming at the status of its

① Defendant C asserted to the effect that, from November 25, 2019 to November 25, 2019, Defendant C ought to be aware of the actual state of AK room from the prosecutor’s investigation stage to reverse Defendant C’s statement at the police investigation stage, and only Defendant A sent HM press article links to the HM press articles and came up with Defendant AK. However, Defendant C’s statement reversed is difficult to trust in full view of the following: (a) the content of the statement that Defendant C took articles as of November 25, 2019 from the Internet CX; and (b) the background leading up to the reversal of the statement.

② Defendant C also has committed a criminal act against Defendant A because it is sufficiently known or known that Defendant A is committing a criminal act by organizing a criminal group.

③ Even if Defendant C did not have access to AK bank, Defendant C posted an advertisement advertisement, etc. on the Internet with sufficient awareness that Defendant C intended to engage in illegal activities, such as the production of sexual exploitation videos against women, and performed the role of exchanging AK criminal proceeds into Korean won in virtual currency. It is reasonable to deem that such act constitutes an act of making the continuation and maintenance of Q AK bank organization solidly through online and offline activities.

2) Of the judgment of the court below of first instance, as to the mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles concerning the crime of hiding criminal proceeds in collusion with Defendant A, etc. of violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (production and distribution of obscene materials), violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (indecent act by compulsion against a child), violation of the Child Welfare Act (indecent act by compulsion against a child), indecent act by compulsion, coercion,

A) Facts of recognition

According to the court below's adopted and examined evidence, the following facts can be acknowledged.

(1) On October 5, 2019, Defendant C: (a) reported an advertisement describing that Defendant A sought a public interest in which it is possible to inquire about the administrative system that Defendant A posted on the EV bulletin; and (b) subsequently, Defendant A sent a date of birth and name from October 31, 2019 to December 2019; (c) based on this, Defendant C sent the date of birth and name of several hundreds including an artist; and (d) based on this, Defendant CE and MR Team’s ID from the childcare integrated information system without permission of the competent authorities, such as an out-of-child inquiry, a love card issuer; and (e) a number of personal information through inquiries into the child care integrated information system; and (e) sent the personal information to Defendant A (the suspect’s suspect interrogation of the police officers on December 31, 2019; (e) one right 2021No2365, 2676).

(2) From October 2019 to October 201, Defendant C asked Defendant C to receive an advertisement day of slopphones, along with the official duties of the government office. Accordingly, from October 2019 to December 31, 2019, Defendant C asked Defendant C to have an advertisement day of slopphones. From October 201, 200, Defendant C had an interview of 4 to 5, CB 4 to 5, and DL from around December 31, 2019: Qal alco, “CT,” “DL,” “not related to the region and age of slopphones,” and 20 to 60 to 30 to 60 to slopphones, “Slopphones, 200 to 1.6 to 20 to 30 to 20 to 30 to 30 to 30 to 16 to 30 to 36 to see that Defendant C20 to 27 to slopphones.

(3) On November 201, 2019, Defendant C was aware of Defendant C’s operation through HM press articles. Defendant C, at the time of the police investigation on December 31, 2019, had “HM press articles on November 2019.11, 2019.” The articles were written in the same form as AK’s criminal act act, and the contents of the advertisement had been advertised by Jeju (Defendant A) from Jeju (Defendant A). Accordingly, it was written to the extent that DT, which called Q, was one of the victims, to which extent the victims would be AK. 1.6, 200, 19, 200, 200, 2000, 2000, 2000, 300,000,000,0000, 300,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 won.

(4) 피고인 A은 2019. 9.경부터 AK방을 운영한 이래로 Q과 관련한 범죄수익금은 가상화폐(비트코인, 모네로)로만 지급받았고, 성착취방 이외의 명목으로 가상화폐를 지급받은 바 없는데(피고인 A에 대한 2020. 5. 26.자 경찰 제13회 피의자신문조서, 2021노236 증거기록 5권, 15267, 15268면), 피고인 C는 2019. 12. 19.부터 피고인 A의 지시에 의해 아동 대상 성착취 영상물, 불법 촬영물 판매 등을 통하여 얻은 범죄수익금(모네로)을 환전하여 주는 MU 업체를 통해 자신의 MV은행 계좌로 돈을 입금받는 방식으로 2019. 12, 19. 모네로 코인 12,96(약 68만 원, 피고인 C의 몫 5만 원), 2019. 12. 23. 모네로 코인 7.17488789(약 30만 원, 피고인 C의 몫 5만 원), 2019. 12. 24. 모네로 코인 3.57948(약 18만 원, 피고인 C의 몫 3만 원), 2019. 12. 26, 모네로 코인 19.238382248 및 4.489306(약 121만 원, 피고인 C의 몫 6만 원), 2019. 12. 27. 모네로 코인 8.662935(약 44만 원, 피고인 C의 몫 4만 원), 2019. 12. 31. 모네로 코인 3,379517(약 17만 원, 피고인 C의 몫 3만 원)을 각 환전하여 본인의 몫을 제외하고 피고인 A이 지정하는 장소에 돈을 두었다(피고인 C에 대한 2020, 1. 1.자 경찰 제2회 피의자신문조서, 2021노236 증거기록 2권 2698, 2699면; 피고인 C에 대한 2020. 1. 7.자 경찰 제3회 피의자신문조서, 2021노236 증거기록 2권 3454면), 한편, 피고인 C는 피고인 A으로부터 2019. 11. 1. 5만 원, 2019. 11. 6. 3만 원, 2019. 11. 14. 5만원을 행정망 조회를 하여 준 대가로 지급받았다(피고인 C에 대한 2020. 1. 7.자 경찰 제3회 피의 자신문조서, 2021노236 증거기록 2권 3446면).

(5) At the time of the police investigation, Defendant C, “I have been aware of the fact that DT was involved in the delivery of proceeds from the crime to AK from December 12, 201,” and was directly admitted as to the facts of concealing proceeds from the crime (the first protocol of suspect interrogation by the police officer dated December 31, 2019, the first protocol of suspect interrogation by the Defendant on December 31, 2019, the evidence record of 2021No236, the evidence record of 1st 2686), and the Defendant also knew that “I would like to conceal and conceal proceeds from the crime,” “I have been aware that I would be related to the exploitation of sex by the police officer” at the police investigation stage, and “I have been aware of the fact that I would be related to the exploitation of sex.”

(6) While Defendant AK is Defendant A and Defendant A was aware that it was engaged in the production and distribution of sexual exploitation videos while operating AK bank, Defendant A posted 4-5 each site on SNS, such as T and CB, as requested by Defendant A, and the purport of Defendant AK’s personal information to inquire about and request the personal information (the purport of conviction that she was a female victim subject to a partial request for inquiry) was the victim of AK, Defendant C was aware of the fact that she was aware of the fact that she was selling the victims’ videos from the end of November 2019 (the police interrogation protocol No. 2021No236, No. 2697, No. 2698, Jan. 1, 2020).

B) Determination

In full view of the facts found earlier, Defendant C produced and distributed a sexual exploitation video product to many victims who operated the AK organization, and the advertisement of Defendant C contributed to the above crime, and he/she was aware that he/she was participating in the concealment of criminal proceeds. Meanwhile, Defendant C did not accurately inform Defendant C of the source of criminal proceeds until December 30, 2019, such as the fact that the amount of KRW 15 million was the profit obtained by the robbery, etc. Meanwhile, Defendant C did not interfere with the recognition of Defendant C’s criminal act or the recognition of his/her participation therein.

Accordingly, Defendant C’s assertion is not accepted on the premise that Defendant C was merely used as Defendant C’s criminal tool, or that Defendant C was first aware of the relationship with Defendant C’s organization and Defendant A around December 30, 2019.

3) As to the part concerning the crime of murder in the judgment of the first instance

A) Relevant legal principles

In order to establish the crime of homicide as stipulated in Articles 255 and 250 of the Criminal Act, there must be an intentional act in preparation for murder, as well as for the purpose of committing the crime stipulated in Article 255 of the Criminal Act, and furthermore, an act of preparation for realizing the crime of homicide that does not reach the commencement date of the commission is required. Although the preparation is not limited to physical acts and there is no special fixed penalty, the intent or plan of the crime cannot be deemed to exist merely, and the external act that may substantially contribute to the realization of the crime of homicide is necessary from an objective perspective (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Do7150, Oct. 29, 2009).

The criminal intent of murder in the crime of murder does not necessarily require the intention of murdering or planned, but it is sufficient to recognize or anticipate the possibility or risk of causing the death of another person due to his/her own act, and its perception or prediction is not only conclusive but also it is so-called willful negligence (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Do4300, Aug. 23, 2007). In a case where the criminal defendant denies his/her criminal intent, it can be proven by means of proving indirect facts highly related to the criminal intent due to the nature of the object (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2013Do4299, Feb. 13, 2014).

B) the facts of recognition

(1) On October 1, 2012, Defendant C issued a sentence of imprisonment for one year and two months with prison labor for a crime of intimidation against FW, including a crime of intimidation around 2012, and a crime of habitual intimidation around 2015, and released on or around March 2019, Defendant C sent a message to a certain extent that he would have known the FW’s contact address again. As such, Defendant C sent a message to the same extent that he would have well known about the FW’s contact. (The Defendant C sent the message that he would die, i.e., the police officer’s second interrogation protocol, 202No236 steam record No. 2703 pages).

(2) Around December 30, 2019, Defendant C asked whether he could take retaliation against Defendant A (FW). Defendant C asked to take retaliation against the fourth floor fire-fighting of the EH apartment EI Ra. Defendant C was 4 million won, 1.5 million won, i.e., the installment savings for the purpose of requesting FW’s retaliation, and 1.5 million won, which the Defendant A exchanged in cash (Mona) acquired through the operation of AK bank (Mona), was placed at the same time before the said firefighting (the police interrogation protocol of December 31, 2019 against Defendant C, 202No236 evidence record, 2673, 2674, 2682) and arrested Defendant C at the investigative agency around that time.

(3) On December 30, 2019, Defendant C informed Defendant A of all appeals, including the content that Defendant A would take a 'FW’s malone and walk alone, FW's resident registration number, mobile phone number, house address, husband and her husband's resident registration number, her husband's her child registration number, FY (2 years old at that time) resident registration number, etc., which was discovered in the public computer network, and Defendant C then notified Defendant C of the address of the child care center accompanying his her her her her son when notifying Defendant A of the address of the her her her her her son’s her son’s her son’s her son’s her son’s her son’s her son’s her son’s her son’s her son’s her son’s son’s her son’s her son’s her son’s her son (Defendant C).

(4) At the time of the police investigation, Defendant C made a statement about the FY of the victim who is only two years of age at the time of the police investigation, and responded to the police's question as "I will not kill ice," "I will be the same as D.I will die.", and "I will know that the suspect is, despite being aware of it, agree that AK should lsheshettttthers on the face of FY and inform the address of the child care center" (N.I.). (The second suspect interrogation protocol of the police officer No. 2021No236, Jan. 1, 2020 against Defendant C, and two rights to evidence records No. 2704).

C) Determination

In light of the aforementioned legal principles, the following circumstances revealed by the lower court and the evidence adopted and investigated by this court, it is recognized that Defendant C’s intent to commit murder and preparation for murder was not only committed against Defendant C’s victim FY, but also external preparation that may substantially contribute to the realization of murder beyond a simple intent or plan for committing murder. The first instance judgment to the same purport is justifiable, and contrary to this purport, Defendant C’s assertion is not acceptable to the effect that the amount Defendant C paid to Defendant A cannot be deemed as the consideration for murder request, or that Defendant C cannot be established as the crime of murder for the reason that there was no intentional or external preparation for murder.

① In full view of the following facts: (a) Defendant C’s statement from Defendant A that she she she shetshes her face at the victim FY’s face and that the address of the child care center was expressed as being good when the victim died (Evidence No. 10, 1747 page); and (b) the content and duration of Defendant C’s intimidation to the victim’s family member; (c) the content and period of the message sent by Defendant C requesting retaliation to Defendant A; and (d) criminal records related to Defendant C’s family members, Defendant C’s criminal records, etc., it can be sufficiently recognized that Defendant C had had an intention of murdering FY at least

② Defendant C specified the method of killing the victim FY, rather than merely harming piracy, by finding it in a child care center between Defendant A and Defendant A, such as “B lsheshesheshet lshet her face.” Furthermore, Defendant A informed Defendant A of the address of the child care center at which the victim FY was enrolled, and 4 million won, which is the consideration for murder, was placed before the fire-fighting designated by Defendant A in order to give Defendant A. From an objective perspective, such act can be sufficiently recognized as an external preparation to realize murder.

③ Even if Defendant A, who tried to prepare and conspires with Defendant C, received only the amount of money for murder by Defendant C, and did not proceed to the actual commission of murder, Defendant A would not be liable for the joint principal offense of murder (preliminary). Defendant C should be held liable for the crime of homicide independently insofar as he/she performed an objective preparation act, such as specifying subjects, methods of murder, etc. with intent to prepare murder and notifying his/her address, and paying the price.

3) Of the judgment below of the court below Nos. 1 and 2, as to the assertion of mental disorder arising from the Ausspatha Post

A) Relevant legal principles

A mental or physical disorder stipulated in Article 10 of the Criminal Act is a biological factor and needs to be determined as lacking or reduced in the ability to distinguish things from one another due to such mental disorder as a psychological factor, other than a mental disorder such as mental disorder or abnormal mental state. Thus, even if a person with a mental disorder is a person with a normal mental disorder at the time of committing a crime, such mental or physical disorder cannot be deemed a mental or physical disorder if he/she had the ability to discern things from one another or control action. The existence of mental or physical disorder is a legal issue to be determined in light of the purpose of punishment system, etc., and the judgment of the court is an important reference for the result of the expert’s mental evaluation. However, the court is not bound by the opinion, but must independently determine the existence of a mental or physical disorder by taking into account the following materials, including the process of committing a crime, means, and the defendant’s behavior before and after committing a crime (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 96Do638, May 10, 196; 2018Do758, Sep.

B) Determination

As alleged by Defendant C and his/her defense counsel, the following facts are as follows: (a) Defendant C was diagnosed by the spirit of Asskikia-gun around September 28, 2012 and was under continuous medical and psychological treatment from that time to that time (Defendant C’s explanation 1, Defendant C’s record 9:10-89 pages); (b) the medical records of Defendant C include ADHD, AD AHD, AS Eskis, Eskis, and depression, and (c) the fact that Defendant C was in a mental and psychological unstable state, such as receiving counseling at a total of 23 EY calls from January 2018 to March 2019 (Defendant C’s vindication, Defendant C’s trial record, and 9:17 of the trial record).

However, in light of the legal principles as seen earlier, even if Defendant C had a sacrific force at the time of committing each of the instant crimes, it cannot be deemed that the aforementioned facts led to the loss of the ability to discern things, or the failure to make a decision, at the time of committing the instant crime. Accordingly, this part of the Defendant and his defense counsel’s assertion is rejected.

① In light of the fact that the Escopia mainly features the difficulty in exchanging with society, the Escopia is a self-scopher disorder. However, on the basis of the fact that the Escopia has a Escopia, it cannot be inferred that the above individual is not aware of the norm, such as “the right to sexual self-determination and dignity of others, must respect the dignity of life, and comply with the basic social norms,” or that there is a sufficient situation to prevent a crime, or that there is always a possibility to block a crime.

② Comprehensively taking account of the specific details and process leading up to each of the crimes with Defendant C, the means and methods of each of the crimes, the attitude before and after each of the crimes, and the circumstances after each of the crimes, etc., Defendant C is not deemed to have been lacking or reduced in the ability to control one’s own acts by mobilization of his own own knowledge about virtual currency exchange, etc. to maintain the risk of changing things, such as clearly understanding the contents of Defendant C’s instructions, and by continuing the crime over several months.

③ Even though the above mental illness of Defendant C was somewhat influenced by the motive and background of each of the instant crimes, it is merely a circumstance to be considered in the normal relationship for sentencing.

E. Judgment on Defendant D’s assertion

1) As to the crime of organizing a criminal organization and joining a criminal organization

A) Alteration of the indictment (additional of the facts charged in the preliminary indictment)

Before the judgment on Defendant D’s assertion is examined, the prosecutor shall make an application for changes in the indictment to the effect that the organization of the existing criminal organization with respect to Defendant D was in the first instance, and that the establishment of the organization and activities of Defendant D was added as the ancillary facts charged, and that the court permitted this and changed the subject of the judgment. Nevertheless, Defendant D’s assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles as to the primary facts charged is still subject to the judgment of this court, and Defendant D’s assertion of facts and misapprehension of legal principles as to the ancillary facts added in the first instance trial is still subject to the judgment of this court, and this part is also judged together because

B) Summary of this part of the facts charged

(1) Main facts charged

피고인 D은 피고인 A, AL, BG, 성명불상(①), 성명불상(③), 성명불상 (⑨), 성명불상(⑫), 성명불상(23), 성명불상(24), 성명불상(25), 성명불상(26), 성명불상(27)과 함께 2019. 9. 하순경 'AK방'의 AR등급 이상 구성원들의 모임인 'BE'라는 Q 그룹에 모여 피고인 A을 중심으로 Q을 이용해 아동·청소년 등 피해자들을 상대로 협박하여 성착취 영상물을 제작하고 이를 공유·배포 및 판매하는 등의 수법으로 아동·청소년의 성보호에관한법률위반(음란물제작·배포), 강제추행 등의 범죄를 함께 저지르고자, 상호간에 피해자 물색·유인 역할(피해자 유인 광고, 개인정보조회 등), 성착취 영상물 제작 역할(성착취 요구, 오프라인 강간 및 촬영 등), 성착취 영상물 배포 역할(성착취 영상물 배포 목적 'AK방' 그룹 관리, 성착취 영상물 게시, 'AK방' 그룹에 대한 광고 등), 수익금 인출 역할 등 유기적인 역할분담 체계를 각각 구축하여 'AK방 조직 '(일명 'CA)이라는 범죄집단을 조직하였다.

(2) Preliminary facts charged (in addition at the trial)

Defendant D was aware that the daily allowances of A and A are crime groups organized for the purpose of the production, distribution, etc. of sexual exploitation videos from the lowerman of September 2019 to October 26 of the same year, but he entered the above crime groups by actively participating in conversations related to crimes, such as the production, etc. of sexual exploitation videos, and by opening up a "BE" group as members of the above crime group by posting at least 10,000 points such as 'AU', 'AT', 'AV', 'AV', 'LH', 'LH', 'BE' and 'BE' group as a small group.

C) Determination of the immediate deliberation

(1) Judgment on the primary facts charged (the point of a criminal group organization)

In full view of all the following circumstances that can be recognized by the lower court and the evidence duly admitted and investigated by this court, it is insufficient to view Defendant D as having already joined the crime group organized by Defendant A, etc. as being seen later by entering the “BE” room. However, the above evidence alone is insufficient to regard Defendant D as having formed a criminal group by gathering Defendant A, etc. around the BE bank, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise. Nevertheless, the lower court found Defendant 1 guilty of the primary facts charged in this part of this part, and thus, it erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine or by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment. Therefore, the allegation of misunderstanding of facts or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on this part of Defendant D is with merit.

① Defendant D joined Q on September 3, 2019, and was engaged in activities from around September 10, 2019. Defendant D started to systematically manage AK by establishing a group of experience points (XP) on September 2019, including establishing BH on BH and implementing a group of experience points (XP). Defendant D had been able to obtain “AR rating” on September 3, 201 as part of Defendant D’s production and distribution of experience points (XP) from around September 201 to around 201. However, Defendant D had been actively asserted that Defendant D’s production and distribution of experience points (XP) as part of Defendant D’s “BE” for the purpose of enabling Defendant D’s participation in the production and distribution of “BE”, and Defendant D’s participation in the production and distribution of a small-scale group of crimes, including Defendant D’s production and distribution.

② In this part of the facts charged, the prosecutor indicted Defendant D as constituting a crime group by establishing a division of roles system by gathering Defendant D with members of not less than a number of AR levels, not less than Defendant A, and “BE”, such as the victim’s physical color and inducement role, the role of producing sexual exploitation video products / the distribution role of sexual exploitation video works / the withdrawal of revenues. However, Defendant D did not clearly have any such role at the time of the participation of the BE bank.

③ Although Defendant A had joined the “BE” room, Defendant A and other members did not have any other role or benefits that were otherwise given to Defendant A and AL, the management parties (BE members had been provided first to the extent that they had been given a long-term period of time, and most participants did not engage in publicity activities, such as spraying from the date of completion of the contract, but did not have been given only to AR participants) under the direction of Defendant A, but continued to engage in activities not only in BE room but also in AP room. AE was operated only for two weeks or three weeks, and a large number of members were continuously engaged in activities in a small scale group after the closure of BE, but it is difficult to view Defendant A’s organization’s participation in the process of organizing and operation of BE group as a long-term group. However, it is difficult to view Defendant AE group’s participation in the process of organizing and operation of BE group.

(2) Determination on the ancillary charge (the act of joining a group of crimes)

In full view of the following circumstances revealed in the above facts admitted by the court below and the evidence adopted by this court, it is reasonable to view that Defendant A organized a crime group by systematically managing the production and distribution media of sexual exploitation video in AT, “AK bank” along with AL and LD, and Defendant D knowingly participated in the production and distribution purpose of sexual exploitation video for the purpose of the production and distribution, and engaged in the activities aimed at the continuation and maintenance of AK bank organizations. Therefore, this part of the facts charged is found guilty, and the other Defendant’s assertion is not accepted.

① The room of “BE” was a small group where only the participants meet the conditions at the time of AR and BJ, and Defendant A did not provide ex post facto special benefits, but first, Defendant A created a separate hosting room with the intent to cause them to feel special benefits, and it is necessary to know a link that is managed and continuously changed by Defendant A, but it is possible to enter such small group and channel as participants, and it is possible to manage Defendant A’s participants (the fifth protocol of examination of the prosecution against Defendant A, the nine right 967 page). At the time, Defendant A had a number of members in the A, but only one of the small group members in the AR such as “BE” or “BF” had continued to maintain the operation of the AE group for more than a certain level, and the 10th class of the AE group could have been actively removed from the Defendant’s role in the AE group, which is more than a certain level, and the 10th class of the AE group’s operation was more and more than a certain level of participation.

② In light of the fact that there is no restriction on the method of joining an already organized organization and that there is no specific criminal act, Defendant D’s participation through hosting within AK, maintenance of the status of AK participants for a given period, perusal and download of sexual exploitation video works, etc. may also be deemed as a valuable commitment to joining a criminal organization.

③ In addition, Defendant D received more than 10 obscene materials from AK to possess them, and came to know of the victim HF. Defendant D sought access to the victim HF through the information published in AK bank, and Defendant D obtained a misunderstanding of “AK at an investigative agency.” During that process, Defendant D had committed a crime of violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (production, distribution, etc. of obscene materials) in a manner similar to Defendant A before entering the AK bank. Defendant D obtained all information on the purpose and rules of AK bank through the comments posted by Defendant A, and sufficiently understood the production process of sexual exploitation videos produced within AK, and became a member of the criminal group for the purpose of distributing and sharing sexual exploitation videos.

④ At the end of November 2019, Defendant D joined “BF” as one of the small groups. The above room was reported from BN bank to HM press, and Defendant A was able to be interested in the media, and Defendant A was able to eliminate all the existing AK bank, and Defendant A was able to become a member of the BN bank. As the name suggested, only a certain level of members (herative participants and AS bank participants) was changed, but some members of the previous BE were active activities. In addition, Defendant BF was able to take part in “BF” to prevent weatherers and police connection, and Defendant BF was able to take part in “BF”’s obscenity photographs (i.e., one’s e., one’s e., one’s e., one’s obscenity and one’s e.g., one’s e., one’s e., one’s e., one’s e.g., one’s obscenity and one’s e., another’s e.1’s e., one’s e.

⑤ Defendant A, B, AL, B, etc. (Defendant D’s clinic) are memoryed as a person who has been extremely actively participating in the NA with large-scale hosting of “NA” (the list stating “NA” as a member’s clinic is considered to constitute a participant in the AR grade and all these participants participated in the public relations activities. This is because, if the majority of the persons in the room were to go up to the AR level, the points were to reach the level of the points, the public relations activities should be extremely opened and actually opened (the AL’s legal statement, trial record, 3rd page 1434), and Defendant D made a statement that the number of persons in the room fell into the AR class and participated in the public relations activities (the AAL’s statement, trial record, 1434 page) at the beginning of the AK game creation, and Defendant D’s participation was extremely opened to the AR class in the ADR game itself regardless of the number of U.S. games itself).

6) Defendant A made a statement that he only saw (which means only viewing) among the participants in the AK bank stated that he was aware of the fact that he was able to do so if he was an active participant for a long time that he was able to know that he was able to do so, that he was able to do so, that he was able to do so, that he was able to do so, that he was able to do so, and that he was able to do so. (In light of the fact that Defendant A’s 5th public prosecutor’s protocol of examination, evidence record 9, evidence record 950, 981) and Defendant A’s statement and Defendant A’s promotion of the protection of the protection of the AK bank by taking advantage of the fact that Defendant A’s statement and Defendant A were provided with a tool to keep and revitalize the AK bank, not merely a means to promote friendship between participants, but also an important means to maintain and revitalize the AK bank.

7) In light of the fact that Defendant D had engaged in a large number of monthly and active activities compared to other Party D's participants, and even up to A' level, even if he did not create a sexual exploitation video product against the victim by operating or managing A's bank or by soliciting with Defendant A to commit an offense, Defendant D cannot be seen as having been staying in the general participant who did not merely collect from A's bank, and it seems to have contributed to maintaining or publicizing the degree of interest of Defendant D's sexual exploitation video products very actively by holding large quantities. Defendant D also did not have any influence on Defendant D's new participant's conversion into A's participation in the 20th session. After that, Defendant D's assertion that Defendant D's act was also an attempted removal of children and juveniles' photographic evidence produced by Defendant D's 2 from around October 2019 as well as that of Defendant D's voluntary disclosure of evidence by Defendant D's aforementioned act constitutes an attempted removal of children and juveniles' photographic evidence.

D) Sub-committee

Ultimately, the evidence presented by the prosecutor alone cannot be deemed to have proved without any reasonable doubt the primary facts charged in the judgment of the first instance court. Nevertheless, the first instance court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged under the premise that the Defendant joined the “OOBE” room, thereby committing a crime of organization of a crime. Of the first instance judgment, the part on the Defendant D in the judgment below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the organization of a crime group or by erroneously recognizing facts in violation of logical and empirical rules, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment. The Defendant D’s assertion pointing this out is with merit. However, the Defendant’s assertion that points this out is guilty of joining the crime group and activities added in the first instance trial to Defendant D, and thus, contrary

2) As to the assertion of illegally collected evidence

A) Facts of recognition

According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the trial court, the following facts can be acknowledged.

(1) Execution of the first warrant

(A) The Seoul Yongsan Police Station Reduction NC, etc. (hereinafter referred to as the “NC, etc.”) sent a message to the parents of AK Victim HF, “ND at risk” through CB, and Defendant D’s operation of AK bank in Q, considered that he committed an attempted crime of coercion against the victim HF. The prosecutor requested the Seoul Western District Court to issue a warrant of search, seizure, and verification on the charge of the above attempted coercion against Defendant D and received the first warrant from the judge on November 4, 2019, with the following contents.

① 영장번호 : 2019-12047죄명 : 강요미수③ 피의자 :D④ 범죄사실:피의자 D(28세)은 CB에서 'ND, Q에서 'NE'라는 아이디를 사용하는 자이고, 피해자 HF(여, 19세)는 어플 'HT'에서 만난 피의자와 한달에 4~5번을 만나 성관계를 갖고 월 200만 원을 받기로 하는 내용으로 조건만남을 하기로 한 자이다.피의자는 2019. 9. 10. 01:00경부터 05:00경 사이에 피해자에게 얼굴이 나오는 노출사진을 요구하였으나, 피해자가 거절한다는 이유로, 그쪽은 이런 사진 유포돼도 상관 없나보죠? 말을 듣지 않으면 조선족 보내서 반 죽여 놓는다, 예쁜 사진 찍게 할 거 (다 벗고 개구리 자세로 바닥에 쭈그려 앉아서 양손으로 브이를 하면서 눈은 천장을 보고 혀를 엄청 내밀고 있는 사진을 보내면서) 이런 사진 찍게 한다, 맨날 똥 싸는 영상 찍게 할 거다, (피 떡이 된 채 무릎 꿇고 있는 여자 사진을 보내면서) 너도 이렇게 될 거다. 나는 니 주소도 알고 번호도 아는데 네 집으로 조선족 보내서 부모님 먼저 작업할 거다. 부모님 길가다 뻑치기 당한다. 앞으로 네 번호로 남자들이 계속 연락할지도 모른다. 네 친구들 가족들 세상 사람들이 네 사진 본다.'라고 피해자를 협박하였다.또한 피의자는 2019. 9. 20. 01:00경부터 같은 날 2:00경까지 불상의 장소에서 Q 메신저를 통해 피해자가 현재 집으로 걸어가고 있다고 대답하자 지금 밖인지 확인을 한다는 이유로 새끼 손가락을 펴고 얼굴이 나오게 사진을 찍어달라고 요구하며, ‘세상사람 다 봐요. 그쪽, 빼거나 꾀부리면 바로 유포요, 얼굴 나오게요, 유포염 지금바로, 사진주세요 좋은말로할 때, 민증 이거 올리구옵니다??'라고 피해자를 협박하였다.이처럼 피의자는 피해자의 나체사진과 민증사진을 유포하겠다고 협박하여 피해자의 얼굴이 나오는 나체사진을 계속하여 촬영하여 전송하게 하는 의무 없는 일을 하게 요구하였으나 그 뜻을 이루지 못하고 미수에 그쳤다.⑤ 압수 · 수색·검증을 필요로 하는 사유피의자는 ND, NE라는 아이디를 사용하면서 피해자의 나체사진을 3,000명이 참여하고 있는 공개채팅방에 유포하겠다고 협박하며 지속적으로 피해자의 노출사진을 요구한 강요혐의가 인정될만한 상당한 이유가 있는 자이다.자신의 인적사항이 특정된 사실을 모르는 피의자는 자칫 출석을 요구할 경우 피해사실을 신고한 사실에 대해 앙심을 품고 피해자의 나체사진 등을 유포할 염려가 있어 출석요구를 하지 않고 체포영장을 발부받아 신병을 확보하여야 하는데, 피의자의 신병을 확보하면서 피의자에 대한 혐의를 명백히 밝히기 위해 위 압수할 물건 기재와 같은 스마트폰 등 전자기기 또는 범죄사실과 관련된 내용을 신속히 확보해야 할 필요성이 있다.⑥ 압수·수색·검증할 장소- 피의자의 주민등록상 주소지, 피의자의 신체 등⑦ 압수·수색·검증할 물건1. 피의자가 소지하거나 피의자의 주민등록상 주소지 및 체포장소에서 보관하고 있는 스마트폰 단말기2. 체포한 장소 및 수색·검증할 장소에 현존하는 피의자 소지 또는 소유 컴퓨터(노트북·태블릿 PC 포함)3. 피의자의 주민등록상 주소지 및 수색·검증할 장소에 현존하는 피의자 소지 또는 소유 CD, USB, 외장하드 등 이동식 저장매체 중 범죄사실과 관련된 내용⑧ 유효기간 : 19. 11. 8.

(B) On November 15, 2019, on the basis of the first warrant, at the second floor audit room of Gyeongnam NF viewing, Defendant D’s working place, the police seized one unit of the main body of the assembly computer (HEXAGN) for Defendant D’s residence, at around 15:30 on the same day, and one unit of the unit of the assembly computer (HEAGON), which is a storage device, at Defendant D’s dwelling. In this case, two out of the outer upper part of the Defendant’s ownership were taken out, but the photographs and images related to the victim HF were not confirmed, and only a large number of sexually related video dynamics were confirmed, the NF police returned to the Defendant on the same day without seizure as the above external part of the two.

(C) On November 7, 2019, Defendant D prepared and submitted to an investigation agency three copies of “written waiver of ownership to waive ownership of the seized electronic devices”, and written and submitted three copies of “written confirmation of release of the original copy” (including 3020 Gohap 294 evidence records, 273 through 286 pages) with respect to the galglus jus jus jus jus jus jus jus jus jus jus jus os PC (including SS cards), AMAON PC, and prefabricated-type computer main body (hereinafter collectively referred to as “electronic devices in this case”).

(D) On November 7, 2019, from around 13:45 to around 15:10, the police officer conducted an interrogation of Defendant D (one time). In that process, Defendant D made a statement to the effect that “IE used the AD ID from CB to ND. However, QANE appears to be the AK’s ID, not its ID. There was a experience of using HT and NG’s sens. There was a 3,000 room entry into QAK in which there are 3,00 persons. However, the room was only a simple conversation. The fact that the victim HF did not agree with the victim’s HF to meet its conditions, and instead, Defendant D made a statement to the effect that “IE made the statement to the effect that IE was a victim of HF and made the statement to the effect that IB through contact with HF in order to assist the victim of HF.”

(E) On November 16, 2019, from around 16:29 to 18:20, the police officer asked Defendant D to interrogate the suspect (two times). During this process, Defendant D responded to the question about the ‘balone photographs and results of women who seem to be children under the age of 19 years' on the gallon of portable telephone, and the reason why the pictures were confirmed.' The defendant D responded to the question that Defendant D was automatically stored because it functions to be automatically stored without storing a part of Q or fish displays when using Q or fish displays. The defendant argued that there was no special relationship with 'AK', and that there was no special relation with 'AK'. However, it is necessary to recognize that the suspect was in possession of the balone photographs of women under the age of 19 years.'

(2) Digital siren analysis and Defendant D’s separate offenses

(A) Around that time, HK slope that was tracking “AK” in the Seoul Metropolitan Police Agency Cyber Investigative Team requested the Ksan Police to transfer the said case to verify the investigation of the victim HF by the Kansan Police, and requested the above case to be transferred around November 22, 2019.

(B) On the other hand, the Yongsan Police requested the analysis of the electronic device of this case prior to the case transfer, and accordingly, it was conducted at the digital forensic center of the Seoul Metropolitan Police Agency in November 12, 2019 (Evidence List 42) and the files already collected following the transfer of this case were sent to the Cyber Investigation Agency of the Seoul Metropolitan Police Agency, not by the Yongsan Police, but by the Yongsan Police. Defendant D returned the electronic device of this case from HK on November 30, 2019.

(다) HK은 2019. 12. 10. "제1차 영장에 기하여 이 사건 전자기기를 현장 반출하고 디지털 포렌식을 의뢰하였는데, 피고인 D의 갤럭시S8 휴대전화(삼성 SD 카드, 유심 포함)에 저장된 전자정보를 탐색하던 중 피해자 HF에 대한 범행 외에 별건 범행이 확인되었고, 디지털 포렌식을 통해 추출한 전자정보 중 메시지 내용을 수색하다가 다수의 미성년자 또는 여성들을 상대로 강요, 협박, 성매매, 통신매체이용음란 등의 범행을 한 것으로 추정되는 내용들이 발견되었다"는 내용의 수사보고를 작성하였다. 이에는 제1차 영장 기재 범죄사실 일시와 근접한 2019. 9.경 불상의 피해여성에게 "만나서 ■■ 가슴 빨아줄라 그랬지, 존나빨려고 그랬단말야, 존나 가슴가지고놀거야 만 지고빨고" 등의 메시지를 전송한 내용 및 위 피해여성에게 "난 안되겠다 평생 후회하게만들어줄게"라는 메시지를 전송한 내용, 2019. 10. 1.경 U 메신저로 "너의 신상을 털었다. 노예를 하지 않으면, 학교를 다니지 못하게 해주겠다"는 메시지를 전송한 내용 및 그와 유사한 내용 등이 다수 포함되었다.

(D) On December 11, 2019, HK: (a) based on the first warrant, requested the instant electronic device to be removed from the site and digital siren; (b) Defendant D’s gallon juthy SD cards (including three-line SD cards and convictions); (c) a separate crime was established in addition to Defendant D’s crime against HF; (d) the files and video files extracted through digital siren are presumed to have been downloaded from QU operated by “AK while searching for the image and video files; and (d) the child sex files were found to have been stored in QU operated by “AK”. As a result of checking the details stored in QUK, it was found that the sum of 2,047 video files were stored in the given SU, and that those files received from QU was found to have been stored in the victim’s first place of investigation, and that it was found to have not been confirmed that the victim’s photograph was connected to the victim’s investigation.

(E) On December 13, 2019, HK: (a) based on the first warrant, requested the instant electronic device to be removed from the site and digital forensic; (b) during searching for the digital information stored in the SD attached to the instant electronic device, other than the crime against the victim HF; and (c) found the digital information extracted through digital siren, as a result, 489 files (including 12 files of HF photographs) out of 11,562 files of image 11,562 can be presumed to be related to AK; (c) there are many pictures and videos presumed to have been connected to the files sent from Qrating room operated by 'AK; and (d) Defendant D is also suspected to have committed an additional crime with 'AK in addition to the crime against the victim HF; and (d) Defendant D is also suspected to have committed an additional crime with respect to child exploitation, etc.; and (e) thus, the relevant digital information should be seized and reported."

(F) In addition, HK prepared an investigation report on December 13, 2019, separately from this process, on November 27, 2019; and on December 9, 2019, by requesting a telecommunications company to provide communications data; and prepared an investigation report on December 13, 2019, specifying the identity of a majority of victims regarding the above additional suspected crimes.

(3) Execution of the second warrant

(A) As above, the prosecutor requested the Seoul Central District Court to issue a search, seizure, and verification warrant with respect to Defendant D’s charge of a separate crime committed by Defendant D, which was discovered and arranged in the course of the execution of the first warrant. On December 17, 2019, the prosecutor issued the second warrant with the following content from the judge.

① 영장번호 : 2019-36037② 죄명 : 강요미수③ 피의자 : D④ 범죄사실:제1차 영장의 범죄사실인 2020. 9. 10.경 강요미수를 일명 'AK', 'AM' 등과 공동으로 범하였다는 것을 비롯해, 2017. 3. 7.경 강요미수 및 강요 단독범행, 2019. 6. 23.경 아동·청소년이용음란물 제작 및 제작미수, 2019. 6. 28.경 아동·청소년 상대 성매매 강요, 2018. 12. 13.경부터 2019. 10, 24.경까지 아동·청소년이용음란물 소지, 2019, 10. 1.경 협박 등⑤ 압수·수색·검증을 필요로 하는 사유제1차 영장 집행하여 이 사건 전자기기를 반출한 후, 디지털 포렌식을 통해 위 전자기기들에서 추출한 전자정보를 분석한 결과, 최초 인지한 피해자 HF에 대한 범행 외에도 'AK' 등 피의자들이 공동으로 범한 피해자들에 대한 전자정보 및 피의자 D이 단독으로 범한 범행 등이 다수 발견되어, 이에 대해 추가 인지함과 동시에 압수수색을 중단하였다.한편, 피해자 HF에 대한 범죄사실만 기재되어 있는 제1차 압수수색영장만으로는 위와 같이 확인되는 별건 범행에 대한 전자정보를 압수할 수 없다.따라서, 위와 같이 피의자 D의 휴대전화 및 컴퓨터에 저장된 전자정보에서 피의자들이 공동으로 범한 별건 범행 및 피의자 D의 단독범행에 대한 내용이 다수 발견되므로, 이를 확보하여 피의자들의 범행 구증하기 위해 압수수색을 필요로 한다.⑥ 압수·수색·검증할 장소- 서울 종로구 사직로8길 31, 서울지방경찰청 사이버수사대 사무실⑦ 압수할 물건1. 혐의사실과 관련된 피의자의 휴대전화 갤럭시S8 본체에 저장된 전자정보1) 검색로그 목록, 계정 목록, 동영상 파일 목록, NI 목록, 브라우저 기록 목록, 사진 파일목록, 휴대전화기기 정보 목록, 채팅방 목록, 클라우드 기록 목록 등이 저장된 엑셀파일2) 혐의사실과 관련된 대화내용이 저장된 메시지 엑셀 파일3) 혐의사실과 관련된 동영상 및 이미지 파일- [동영상] 폴더에 저장된 파일 중, Q에서 다운로드 받은 것으로 추정되는 동영상 파일 1,376개 및 아동성착취물 소지 범죄일람표에 기재된 아동성착취물 동영상 82개 포함- [메시지] 폴더에 저장된 파일 중, 피의자가 피해자들과 송수신한 동영상 파일 7개, 이미지 파일 7개 포함- [NI] 폴더에 저장된 파일 중, Q에서 송수신한 것으로 추정되는 jpg 파일 7,199개, mp4파일 874개 포함- [사진] 폴더에 저장된 파일 중, Q에서 다운로드 받은 것으로 추정되는 이미지 파일 25,555개 및 아동성착취물 소지 범죄일람표에 기재된 아동성착취물 이미지 파일 26개 포함2. 혐의사실과 관련된 피의자의 휴대전화 갤럭시S8 SD카드에 저장된 전자정보1) 사진 파일 목록, 동영상 파일 목록이 저장된 엑셀파일2) 혐의사실과 관련된 동영상 및 이미지 파일- [동영상] 폴더에 저장된 파일 중, 아동성착취물 제작 범죄일람표에 기재된 동영상 파일 10개 및 불법촬영물 촬영 범최일람표에 기재된 동영상 파일 7개 포함- [사진] 폴더에 저장된 파일 중, 아동성착취물 제작 범죄일람표에 기재된 이미지 파일 1개 및 피의자 자신의 성기를 촬영한 이미지 파일 2개 포함3. 혐의사실과 관련된 피의자의 조립식PC에 저장된 전자정보1) 사진 파일 목록, 동영상 파일 목록이 저장된 엑셀파일2) 혐의사실과 관련된 동영상 및 이미지 파일- [Pictures] 폴더에 저장된 파일 중 피해자 NJ에게 수신한 이미지 파일 1개, Q에서 다운로드 받은 것으로 추정되는 jpg파일 555개, 아동성착취물 소지 범죄일람표에 기재된 이미지 파일 11개 포함Video] 폴더에 저장된 파일 중 Q에서 다운로드 받은 것으로 추정되는 mp4파일 249개 및 복원 파일 38개, 아동성착취물 소지 범죄일람표에 기재된 동영상 파일 15개 포함⑧ 유효기간 : 19. 12. 31.⑨ 7일을 넘는 유효기간을 필요로 하는 취지와 사유본 압수수색영장은 피의자를 참여시키고 집행하여야 하는데, 현재 피의자가 'NF시청'에서 공무원으로 근무하고 있어, 일정 조율 등을 위해서는 7일을 넘는 유효기간을 필요로 함.

(B) On December 18, 2019, HK: (a) drafted two copies of “Electronic Information List” in which the value of zip files already collected through digital siren 1, as shown below; (b) from around 09:00 to around 10:12, HK seized digital information related to Defendant D’s charges in accordance with the second warrant; (c) the Defendant collected zip files from 1’s zip files to 5’s zip files through digital siren 1; and (d) HK re-issueded the same type of digital information at the time of seizure and 10’s e-mail; and (e) obtained the same type of digital information from the 5’s zip files to 1’s e-mail; and (e) obtained the same from the 5’s e-mail list as the e-mail’s e-mail’s e-mail from the e-mail’s e-mail list to 219’s e-mail e-mail.g.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

(C) On December 19, 2019, the Seoul Regional Police Agency executed the second warrant against the Defendant on December 19, 2019: “On the enforcement of the first warrant, 6 electronic data stored in WD Dogal gal lusium 2019-12047, 208, 1 electronic data stored in WD gal gal lusium jusium 2019-12047, and 1 electronic data stored in prefabricated PC 2019:0, 2019, 2019-36037, 36037, and 209, 209, 209, 2089, 209, 309, 308, 309, 208, 309, 208, 309, 209, 209, 308, 2019.”

(D) From 09:15 on December 19, 2019 to 20:47, HK made inquiries about Defendant D’s suspect interrogation (three times). During that process, Defendant D asked Defendant D to the effect that she is not a “AK” or “AK” due to Defendant D’s denial of this, Defendant D made all the information known about her ‘AK’ or ‘AK’ or ‘AK’. Accordingly, Defendant D made a statement about Defendant D’s coercion and attempted coercion, production and attempted production of child or juvenile exploitation, coercion of child or juvenile sex trafficking, sexual harassment against children, sexual harassment against children, etc., sexual abuse, non-approval of unlawful photographing objects, illegal photographing, secret photographing, secret photographing, secret photographing, communication media use, etc. Defendant D made a confession to the effect that Defendant D made a statement about various suspected charges, such as coercion and coercion, production and attempted production of child or juvenile exploitation, sexual harassment, etc.

(4) Non-prosecution decision on the facts constituting the crime stated in the first warrant against Defendant D

On April 13, 2020, the Seoul Central District Public Prosecutor's GZ decided not to prosecute the victim HF in collusion with Defendant A on the ground of lack of evidence regarding the facts constituting an offense stated in the first warrant, etc., for which Defendant D, from September 10, 2019 to September 20, 2019, committed a violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Indecent Act by Indecent Act, the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (amera, etc. photographing), coercion, and attempted coercion.

B) Scope of search and seizure at the time of enforcement of the first warrant

(1) Relevant legal principles

Even in exceptional cases where search and seizure of digital information is permitted, the act of searching, copying, and printing out digital information irrelevant to the facts charged, in principle, constitutes an unlawful search and seizure. However, in cases where digital information irrelevant to the facts charged is discovered in the course of lawful search and seizure of digital information prior to the expiration of the search and seizure, an investigation agency may lawfully search and seize such information only when it suspends further further search and obtains a search and seizure warrant for a separate criminal offense from the court (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 201Mo1839, Jul. 16, 2015).

Article 215(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act provides, “A public prosecutor may seize, search, or inspect evidence by a warrant issued by a judge of the competent district court, only when there is a circumstance to suspect that a suspect has committed a crime when necessary for a criminal investigation.” Therefore, where a separate evidence irrelevant to the suspected criminal fact which was the ground for issuing a warrant has been seized, this cannot, in principle, be used as evidence for conviction. However, in cases of a crime which is the object of search and seizure or a crime related thereto, the outcome of search and seizure may be used as evidence of guilt. Inasmuch as a crime related to the suspected criminal fact of a search and seizure warrant means a crime related to a person subject to a search and seizure warrant and a suspect, which is personal relations between him/her and the same person. Of note, the objective relevance between the suspected criminal facts stated in the search and seizure warrant and the same criminal facts is not only related to the same criminal fact or the motive, method and time of the crime, and time of the crime, and the objective relation between the suspect and the suspect can only be acknowledged as either objective or indirect evidence (see, etc. 201).

(2) Determination

Examining the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined at the court below and the court below in light of the aforementioned legal principles, since the investigation agency discovered evidence suspected of having committed a separate crime in the process of lawfully searching digital information based on the first warrant, it is difficult to deem that there was a special violation of law since the investigation agency requested and issued the second warrant through a reasonable verification procedure as to the suspected criminal facts, and thereby duly seized the above evidence. Even if the search and seizure process based on the second warrant during the search and seizure process (as a result and before the second warrant is issued), even if the execution of search and seizure or investigation on the suspected criminal facts of Defendant D’s separate crime was conducted, it appears that the separate crime of Defendant D appears to have objective relationship and human nature as a crime identical or similar to the criminal facts stated in the first warrant, and thus, it is difficult to view that the search and seizure of the digital information extracted from the electronic device of this case was unlawful or that the remainder of evidence acquired based on the above digital information is inadmissible as evidence.

① An investigative agency issued a first warrant and seized the instant electronic device. During this process, the investigative agency obtained “written waiver of ownership of the electronic device explicitly seized by Defendant D” and “written confirmation of release of the original” with the content that she will not participate in the process of searching, copying, and printing the digital device, storage medium, or duplicate. It seems impossible for the investigative agency to immediately become aware of all the contents while executing the warrant. At the first stage of the execution of the warrant, the digital forensic center extracted and copied the message, photograph, and video files stored in the electronic device by “influence” without distinguishing the information related to the suspected crime stated in the first warrant and the information related to the separate criminal charges, and it seems impossible for the criminal investigation agency to find out the fact that the digital device contained in the instant electronic device was influence, and that the process of checking and confirming the victim’s information will only be accompanied by the victim’s defluence, as it appears that the process of enforcing the warrant was legitimate and continuous.

② On November 2, 2019, HK did not immediately request the second warrant to the court against suspected criminal facts after acquiring the case from the police officer in Yongsansan. However, the amount of evidence seized by Defendant D is very serious, and it appears that the working-level staff member who handled the investigation agency’s work to verify only the number of files being actually input into the relevant work would have no HK. On the investigation report, HK appears to have continuously sought the second warrant, and it appears that the secondary request for the warrant was searched without any intention to illegally interfere with the procedure for the request for the second warrant. Considering that it is inevitable to specify a certain extent of the criminal facts (such as the date, time, place, and content of the crime) for the second warrant, such as the second warrant, it is difficult to view that HK obtained the second warrant from the police officer’s request for the second warrant to obtain the second warrant, and that it is difficult to immediately conclude that the second warrant should have been issued to obtain the second warrant from the police officer’s request for the second warrant to obtain the second warrant.

③ The facts charged in the first warrant are that Defendant D attempted to force or attempted the HF of the victim through Q, etc. around September 2019, and the part concerning coercion, attempted coercion, intimidation, etc. among the facts charged by an investigation agency, among the facts charged by an additional investigation agency, Defendant D through Q, etc. from 2016 to 2019 (including the suspicion of highly close to September 2019). As such, since the subject of the first warrant and the Defendant D are the same person, human relations is recognized, taking into account the similarity between the number of crimes, the similarity of the criminal law at the time of the crime, the adjacent nature of the crime, and the possibility of acquiring the relevant electronic information from the relevant crime, it is difficult to view that there is no objective relationship between the facts charged in the first warrant and the facts charged in the separate crime.

④ At the time of the first warrant request, Defendant D could be presumed to have committed an offense described in the first warrant as it was suspected that Defendant D had been committed. In the digital information extracted from the electronic device of this case based on the first warrant, there was evidence such as not only evidence of suspected criminal facts stated in the first warrant, but also pictures and videos of the criminal facts related to “AK.” In other words, the digital information seized based on the second warrant can be used as indirect evidence or circumstantial evidence 13 that the Defendant, who was suspected of committing an attempted offense against HF in collusion with 'AK' or 'AK, could be used as evidence of suspected criminal facts as stated in the first warrant, and it would be probable that the investigation agency's execution of the warrant was not related to 'A.19' (the defense counsel of Defendant D was stated as Defendant D 2', and it was not related to 'A.19' before and after November 7, 2019.

⑤ Although the facts constituting the crime stated in the first warrant were final and conclusive due to the lack of evidence as to the conspiracys of Defendant D and Defendant A, the disposition of non-prosecution was issued to the effect that Defendant D would not have been ultimately suspected, this is merely an ex post facto circumstance, and at the time of search and seizure, there was evidence to doubt that Defendant D would have committed a crime jointly with 'AK' or 'AK', it is reasonable to view that the separate crimes also constitute 'AK'-related crimes and thus, Defendant D would not be subject to punishment.

C) Whether procedural errors were committed at the time of enforcement of the second warrant

(1) Relevant legal principles

Even in cases where a search and seizure of a storage device is conducted by transferring the storage device or Hadscop, or a form already requisitioned (hereinafter referred to as “duplicate”) to an investigation agency, etc. as a result of exceptional circumstances acknowledged that it is impossible to determine the scope in the course of search and seizure, or significantly difficult to achieve the purpose of search and seizure, the warrant principle and due process should be complied with, such as taking appropriate measures to ensure the opportunity to participate in the search and seizure or defense counsel as prescribed in Articles 219 and 121 of the Criminal Procedure Act (hereinafter referred to as “the party against whom the search and seizure was made”) or to prevent the arbitrary reproduction, etc. of digital information irrelevant to the facts charged. If such measures were not taken, the search and seizure cannot be deemed lawful unless there are special circumstances, such as where the party against whom the search and seizure was made explicitly expressed his/her intention not to participate in the search, or the nature and content of the process of the offense committed (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2016Mo1816).

According to Articles 219 and 129 of the Criminal Procedure Act, a list of seized articles shall be prepared and delivered to the owner, possessor, custodian, or any other equivalent person. In addition, when the execution of a search and seizure warrant is completed by searching, copying, and printing information related to the suspected criminal facts, the court may, without delay, determine to deliver a detailed list of seized articles to the suspect, etc.

In the case of files, etc. containing electronic documents, taking into account not only the signature or seal of the originator, but also the risk of editing and operating the contents by the originator, manager, or specific technology, the original shall be proved to be a copy of the original without any artificial adaptation, such as editing in the course of duplication, and if there is no proof, the admissibility of evidence may not be readily recognized. Furthermore, the fact that a copy or output of an electronic document submitted as evidence is copied and output of the original without any artificial adaptation, such as editing in the course of duplication and printing, can be determined by comprehensively taking into account all the circumstances, including the testimony or statement of a person involved in the process of producing, delivering, storing, etc. the copy or output of the electronic document file, comparison of the amount of Hh value of the year immediately after the creation of the original or copy file, and the result of verification and appraisal of the electronic document file (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 201Do2637, Feb. 17, 2018).

(2) Determination

In full view of the following circumstances, it is difficult to deem that there was a serious procedural error, such as that Defendant D’s right to participate was not substantially guaranteed during the execution of the second warrant, or that Defendant D did not deliver a lawful seizure list, based on the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court and the lower court.

① On November 7, 2019, Defendant D issued a warrant on December 17, 2019, and submitted to the investigative agency a “written confirmation of the release of the original copy” with the effect that Defendant D will not participate in the process of searching, copying, and printing digital information on digital devices and storage devices or copies thereof, and the investigative agency carried out the instant electronic device “is subject to more than seven (7) days to ensure Defendant D’s right to participate.” On December 19, 2019, Defendant D was present at Seoul Provincial Police Agency and presented an opportunity to search and seize the digital information through HK’s computer monitors, and Defendant D was not subject to seizure and digital information’s key opportunity to participate in the procedure. However, Defendant D’s seizure and digital information was not subject to seizure and digital information’s key opportunity to participate in the procedure.

② Defendant D’s defense counsel granted Defendant D only a detailed list of zip files that had been reconstructed by the investigative agency based on the first warrant, and the digital information confiscated based on the second warrant did not show its content and did not have been delivered a detailed list. As such, Defendant D’s defense counsel asserted that: (a) the investigative agency then provided the Defendant D with a detailed list of zip files that had been compresseded, and (b) the investigative agency provided it with a “electronic confirmation document regarding the digital information confiscated based on the second warrant from Defendant D,” stating that there was no specific list of each file; (c) the digital information that was seized by the investigative agency based on the second warrant did not present its content; and (d) then, (d) the investigative agency provided a “electronic confirmation document” for the digital information that was seized based on the second warrant from Defendant D, stating that there was no serious problem between the two files and the value of each file, and thus, it cannot be seen as inappropriate or unlawful in light of the fact that there was no serious problem in terms of the existence and value of the electronic information.

③ Defendant D’s defense counsel asserted that the identity of evidence is denied because the sea value of the compressed file as of December 18, 2019 differs from that of the compressed file as of December 19, 2019. However, inasmuch as it was confirmed that, after the cancellation of the compressed file, it would inevitably change the sea value of the compressed file because the compressed file itself would change if it is repressed again after the cancellation, Defendant D’s defense counsel cannot be seen as denying the identity of evidence on the ground that the sea value of the digital information seized was changed in the process of repressing the files, and that the digital information seized was not modified or changed from the original text, it is difficult to view that the identity of evidence is denied on the ground that the digital information seized by Defendant D’s defense counsel was changed in the process of searching and copying the digital information seized at the request of Defendant D’s defense counsel; Defendant D’s defense counsel’s testimony and evidence presented to the court is also unlawful; Defendant D’s defense counsel’s testimony and evidence presented to the court is also unlawful.

④ Furthermore, even though the investigative agency did not notify Defendant D of the right to participate in the search and seizure related to the charge of separate crimes in writing and did not confirm Defendant D’s intent to participate in the search and seizure, and did not deliver a detailed list of digital information containing a piracy value for each file of the seized digital information, or partially deleted the message irrelevant to the charge, such procedural defect appears to be relatively insignificant in light of the whole process of the execution of the warrant, and cannot be deemed to have been attributable to the intent to avoid the warrant requirement or to have infringed on the substantial content of due process.

C) Probative value of electronic information obtained based on the second warrant

Therefore, even if the collection of evidence by the investigative agency based on the execution of the first and second warrants is somewhat inappropriate or minor, it is deemed legitimate as a whole even if there is a violation of the procedural provisions of search and seizure under some Criminal Procedure Act. Even if there is illegality, the following is an exceptional case where: (a) the purport of the procedural provisions such as circumstances, etc.; (b) details and degree of such violation; (c) specific course and possibility of evasion; (d) specific course and degree of violation; (e) relation between the right to protect the procedural provisions or legal interests; (e) relation between the defendant and the process violation and the collection of evidence; and (e) awareness and intent of the investigative agency, etc. in a comprehensive and comprehensive manner, it is reasonable to deem that the act of violation of the procedure by the investigative agency in this case does not constitute a violation of the substantive contents of due process; and (e) the exclusion of admissibility of evidence constitutes an exceptional case where the Constitution and the Criminal Procedure Act establish the steel

① Even if an investigative agency, as a result, seizes electronic information irrelevant to the facts charged in the first warrant, it is difficult to view that the investigative agency requested a search and seizure warrant for the purpose of investigating the facts charged other than the facts charged as stated in the request for a warrant or for the purpose of collecting such evidence, and that it intentionally seizes an article irrelevant to the facts charged in the initial warrant and uses it as evidence for other facts charged. At the time of the execution of the first warrant, the investigative agency seized the electronic device of this case and its stored electronic information as evidence for the first warrant, deeming it as related to the facts charged in the first warrant, and later, it did not constitute evidence of the facts charged in the first warrant. On the other hand, the investigation agency discovered that the electronic information constitutes evidence of the facts charged in the second warrant, while it did not constitute evidence of the other facts charged in the first warrant, and obtained a second warrant from a judge and again confiscated electronic information in such a series of proceedings, and thus, it does not constitute an unlawful act in violation of the principles and procedures of investigation as prescribed in the Constitution and the Criminal Procedure Act.

② As a new online crime group appeared, an anonymous and encryption technology developed in order to avoid the monitoring network of an investigative agency is actively used, and an investigative agency needs to use proportional means in order to cope with threats to children and juveniles in a balanced way to protect the rights and interests of the victims. However, it is difficult to investigate into the nature of digital sex crimes committed against many unspecified and unspecified persons in a large scale by using online and non-faced electronic devices, etc., or by searching and searching electronic information, etc. contained in the digital sex offense device. Defendant D’s individual crime is a content such as accessing children and juveniles about a sex relation, etc., or transmission of photographed materials, etc., and its liability for such crime cannot be denied. The digital information seized in the second warrant is a critical evidence supporting the crime.

Defendant D also did not raise any objection to the above procedure, including the above search and seizure, and all facts constituting an individual crime are recognized, and there is no reason to suspect the voluntariness or credibility thereof. Defendant D’s evidence of the crime can be sufficiently acknowledged not only as one’s confession, but also as evidence through the search and seizure of this case, and as evidence of the victim’s statement. However, if Defendant D rejected all the above evidence and statement evidence solely on the ground that there was an error in the enforcement of the warrant, and subsequently acquitted Defendant D on the ground that there was no corroborative evidence of confession, the degree of procedural illegality during the process of collecting evidence is compared and compared to the degree of the gravity of the crime of this case and the degree of the secondary procedural illegality during the investigative agency’s collection of evidence, excluding the admissibility of the above electronic information including the secondary evidence would result in a violation of the purpose of realizing criminal justice by promoting harmony between the principle

③ In addition to the crime against HF of the first recognized victim, the investigative agency discovered a majority of the crimes committed by 'AK' and the crimes committed by 'D' alone, and applied for the second warrant along with the contents of the additional investigation. A judge issued the second warrant after reviewing all the above contents. If, through the investigation records attached to the request for the warrant, the judge could have known or could have known the illegality of the first investigation procedure, but he/she issued the warrant with emphasis on the discovery of substantive truth and the necessity of investigation, etc., it is reasonable to evaluate the causal relationship between the procedural illegality and the first evidence collection process. Therefore, even if the investigative agency partly erred in the process of the first warrant execution, it is reasonable to view that the digital information seized therefrom is admissible as evidence.

In the end, the evidence collected by the execution of the second warrant or the second warrant and the second evidence collected by the investigation agency can be used as evidence of conviction.

4) Conclusion

Thus, this part of the defendant D's defense counsel's assertion is not accepted, under the premise that the evidence acquired based on the warrant Nos. 1 and 2 is not admissible as illegally collected evidence.

F. Determination on Defendant E’s assertion

1) As to the part concerning the joining and activity of a criminal organization

A) Facts of recognition

According to the court below's adopted and examined evidence, the following facts can be acknowledged.

(1) From September 2019, Defendant E participated in AK and repeatedly downloaded a sexual exploitation video product, and transferred KRW 550,000 won of virtual currency to DI Bank (AK where Defendant A was unaware of the existence of a sexual exploitation video product that was not disclosed to the public) on November 2019. Defendant A participated in Defendant E, not DI Bank, in BN Bank and small group BF, not in DI Bank, and participated in such activities, Defendant A participated in the activities of AK by means of a certification, etc. after putting it up to the other room (the suspect interrogation committee of Defendant E, evidence interrogation committee of June 21, 201, evidence inspection committee of Defendant E, and evidence inspection committee of 631 page 631).

(2) Defendant A, upon Defendant E’s request, had the victims wear a photograph by making a statement, such as name written in his name and anus, and Defendant E participated in the victim Ly CX real-time search event event, and Defendant E was asked to ask her choice to commit fraud against the victim DY (Defendant A’s statement in court, Defendant A’s protocol of examination of suspect, and evidence record No. 6631 page on June 21, 2020).

(3) At the prosecution investigation stage, Defendant E stated, “At the time of the investigation stage, the instant AK does not alone commit a crime, but it was evident that several persons, including those who were in “BF, have produced and distributed sexual exploitation video works against victims,” and made it clear that Defendant E had engaged in the production and distribution of sexual exploitation video works against the victims (the 6th prosecutor’s interrogation protocol on June 21, 2020 against Defendant E, the 17th prosecutor’s interrogation record, and the 6638 pages of evidence record);

B) Determination

Examining the above facts in light of the legal principles as seen earlier, Defendant E’s series of acts, such as requesting the production of sexual exploitations, providing funds for committing crimes, and actively taking part in the hosting of the victims at AK, is an act of participating in the organization and participating in the organization as a member and pursuing the continued existence and maintenance of the group based on the organizational decision-making of the crime group, and it is determined that Defendant E’s participation and activities as a member of the AK bank.

Accordingly, we do not accept the assertion that Defendant E did not have the awareness that he was a criminal group of the above organization and that he did not join or act for him.

2) Regarding the violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse and the violation of the Child Welfare Act against victims (LB)

A) Facts of recognition

According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and this court, the following facts can be acknowledged.

(1) The victim (LB) has a appearance that cannot be seen as an adult even from one eye (the final crime committed against the defendant E, the evidence record 37 pages 1704 page), and the defendant A distributed the victim (LB)'s juvenile identification through AK bank (the defendant E) (the second interrogation protocol of the police on May 7, 2020, the evidence record 30 copies, the evidence record 557 pages).

(2) From the police investigation stage, Defendant E stated that “I do not have any material to confirm the age of the pictures seen as 10 and high school students,” “I do not have any material to confirm that the pictures seen as 10 and high school students could have shown the age of the minors,” and “I would like to know whether I are 10 students or not, and most of the AK images admitted by the AK were 20 women, and there are 10 photographs, which are suitable for the accurate age,” and “I have no identification card that can be presumed as 10 if I have shown that I would have shown that I would have been 10.” (The Defendant’s interrogation of the police suspect, evidence record 30 and 433 pages as of April 6, 2020 against the Defendant).

(3) At the time of Defendant E’s activity at AK, the information was shared with the information of 15 years of age and 18 years of age, and E participated in the event that real-time search took place in the name of a minor who contributed to TV program, Defendant E also stated that some of the victims’ ages were “not later than 10 years of age,” and the investigative agency presented a victim’s photograph and asked the victim’s photograph that “the victim is considered to be a juvenile without doubt on external appearance.” The suspect also responded to the question “the police interrogation protocol, police record, evidence record, 30, 45-462 pages against Defendant E on April 6, 2020; the interrogation protocol, evidence record, evidence record, 30, 572 pages against Defendant E on May 7, 2020.

C) Determination

In full view of the above circumstances, Defendant E is sufficiently recognized that at least the victim (LB) was aware of the fact that he/she is a child or juvenile. Accordingly, Defendant E and his/her defense counsel are not acceptable.

G. Determination as to Defendant F’s assertion on the part concerning Defendant F’s criminal organization membership activities

1) Facts of recognition

According to the court below's adopted and examined evidence, the following facts can be acknowledged.

A) On September 1, 2019, Defendant F first connected to AK on September 1, 2019, and on September 11, 2019, Defendant F sent the virtual currency of KRW 400,000,000 to Defendant A in order to join Q individual dialogue. On November 2019, Defendant F wired the virtual currency of KRW 1,00,000,000 for two occasions from September 12, 2019 to December 25, 2019, including remitting the virtual currency of KRW 3,60,000 from September 11, 2019 to “BF” AK bank and participated in hosting with Defendant F’s suspect examination right on June 3, 202, the record of the suspect examination of Defendant F, the record of evidence 1 to 2626,265-268, the record of evidence, and the record of 265-265,2665).

B) On November 3, 2019, Defendant F demanded the attitude of four victims according to the direction of Defendant F, and Defendant F, at the request of Defendant F, shared the attitude that victims were sitting on the sofion, dancing, attitude of water-savings, boomure, wire line, and sent pictures to AK. Defendant F sent the pictures to Defendant F (Defendant A’s legal statement, Defendant A’s trial record, Defendant 2 right 1033; Defendant F’s prosecutor’s examination record, evidence evidence record 17 rights 6233; Defendant F’s examination record, evidence record, and evidence record 17 rights 6233). In addition, Defendant F shared, at the direction of Defendant F, obscene promotion materials or links attached to AK (a obscenity) or links for the purpose of promoting AK under the direction of Defendant F and certified (a suspect examination record of Defendant F, Defendant F’s suspect examination right on June 3, 200, evidence 36, 276).

C) Defendant F stated, at the time of the AKS activities, that certain victims were minors, and that “the images of the victims were considered to have been taken without any rhetor’s intimidation and without any rhetor’s intimidation.” (The interrogation protocol of the prosecution as of June 3, 2020 against Defendant F, the interrogation protocol of the prosecution as of June 3, 2020, the record of evidence No. 17 right 6234; Defendant F’s interrogation protocol of the prosecution as of April 20, 2020, the record of evidence No. 13432 pages).

D) Defendant F provided Defendant F with personal information, such as identification card, to Defendant A, and made a statement to Defendant F that he she was brupted by the fear of contact with Defendant A even after withdrawal from AK (the suspect interrogation protocol of Defendant F, the suspect interrogation protocol of the prosecution as of April 20, 200, and the evidence record of 13 346-3449 page).

2) Determination.

In light of the above legal principles, Defendant F continued to engage in activities such as requesting the victims to produce sexual exploitations from September 2019 to November 201, 2019, and transferring money to the address of virtual currency A designated by Defendant A, attracting group, actively taking part in hosting, etc., Defendant F’s act in the AK room is determined as an act aimed at joining and maintaining the AK bank organization as a member of the AK bank and based on the organizational decision-making of the criminal group. On the contrary, Defendant F was guilty of fraud without the intent of Defendant F to act in the AK bank or small-scale group, and it does not accept the allegation to the effect that Defendant F took part in the criminal organization, which is compatible with AF group’s criminal act, since F did not have any influence on Defendant F’s criminal act by deceiving Defendant F as a member of the AK bank.

4. Determination on the assertion of unfair sentencing between Defendant B, E, and F

A. The premise for sentencing common to all the Defendants

As a result of the development of information and communication technology, new digital sex crimes have been created, such as production and sharing of illegal obscenity, gymnasium, deep obscenity (human and visual composites using artificial intelligence technology). Furthermore, as new digital sex crimes are developed in the form of anonymous participation by many people without a distance from time to time, they have developed in the form of organized participation of many people, and the degree of damage is also very serious as much as possible in terms of the form and method of the crime and the degree of the damage are expanding to an unreceptable level."On the basis of the case of 'X bank', many of the victims of digital sex crimes are likely to have been exposed to sexual crimes in the form of sexual crimes, such as sexual exploitation in the surface of the water, and have a large probability of being exposed to the victims of digital sex crimes and have not been able to enjoy it directly from the online, but from the perspective of being exposed to the victims of sexual crimes and have no potential to enjoy it directly from the digital society.

The crime group in which the Defendants participated committed the crime of production and distribution of sexual exploitation video products systematically by sharing the victim's physical color and inducement (victim's inducement, personal information inquiry, etc.), production of sexual exploitation video products (sex exploitation request, hot-frain rape and photographing etc.), distribution of sexual exploitation video products (AK group management, posting of sexual exploitation video works, advertising of AK bank group), withdrawal of profits, etc. The victims and young children and young children are included and distributed. The Defendants shared and distributed links that can come into the relevant hosting, and made it difficult for them to conduct the investigation and prevention of sexual exploitation at the level of AF, and made it difficult for the participants of AF to use the sexual exploitation in order to avoid reporting and tracking virtual currency, and made it difficult for them to use them more systematically and repeatedly, and made it difficult for the AF government to observe the AF government's instructions for systematic investigation and prevention of sexual exploitation, and made it difficult for the AF government to use them.

Defendant A, the principal offender, threatened the victims to be subject to the Defendant A by threatening them to obtain the victims’ photo and personal information, and spread it to the Defendant, and had the victims take a sexually insulting and insulting photo and videos, and spread it to the victims by disclosing personal information as well as by raising the victims’ sexual exploitation images. The aforementioned pictures and videos were distributed through a large number of participants participating in the AK bank and are likely to spread in the future. As such, the victims’ life cannot be returned to their transfer. As for the Defendants who participated in the sexual crime systematically by forming a crime group, strict punishment is inevitable in light of the seriousness of the crime, even though their status and role within the group, the period of participation in the crime, the number of victims, the degree of damage recovery, and the relationship of cooperation in investigation, etc. are somewhat different.

Meanwhile, the term “unfair sentencing” refers to cases where the sentence of the lower judgment is too heavy or too minor in light of the specific contents of the case. Sentencing is based on statutory penalty, based on a reasonable and reasonable scope of discretion that takes place within a reasonable and reasonable scope by comprehensively taking into account the factors attached to the sentencing prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act. In light of the inherent area of the first instance court and the ex post facto heart nature of the appellate court, in cases where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and the first instance court’s sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 201

B. As to Defendant B

1) Determination on the assertion of unfair sentencing by both parties

The crime of this case was committed by the defendant who participated in the AK organization as a manager and publicizeds "AK", play a role in inducing victims and recruiting participants, and actively spreads sexual exploitation video products produced by "AK". In this case where the crime was committed systematically, the defendant took part in the crime and distributed sexual exploitation voluntarily without any awareness of the crime, and increased the number of participants in AK as soon as the number of participants recruited by the defendant increased. In light of the contents and circumstances of the crime, the degree of the defendant's participation and contribution are not small. Accordingly, even though the damage of many victims has been accumulated and repeated, it is inevitable to punish the defendant. Accordingly, it is inevitable to punish the defendant.

However, at the trial, the Defendant agreed with two victims. At the time of the instant crime (the age of 15), the Defendant was the first offender who has no record of criminal punishment, and there is room for improving the character and behavior through correction and edification as well as the present age juveniles. The Defendant, as an economic problem, has grown in a unstable family environment where his parents frequently wird and violent violence was committed, and the father did not have any interest in fostering and sending most of the time to a mixed person, which led to the instant crime in connection with “AK” and had no opportunity to spread properly with the absence of state protection and care. This is the circumstances that can be considered in favor of the Defendant.

In addition to these circumstances, the sentence of the first instance court is just within the reasonable scope of discretion, and it is unreasonable or unreasonable in light of the following: (a) although the punishment of the Defendant was the maximum term of ten (10) years in the first instance court; (b) while the punishment of the short term of five (5) years is the highest term under the Juvenile Act, it is difficult to see that the punishment is excessive in case of comparison with the adult who committed the same kind of crime as an irregular term; (c) although there was an agreement with some victims, it did not recover damage to a large number of victims; and (d) the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, environment, motive and background of the crime; (e) relationship with the victim; and (e) circumstances after the crime, etc.

2) Determination as to the prosecutor’s improper assertion of exemption from disclosure disclosure disclosure order

The first instance court exempted the Defendant from issuing an order to disclose and notify the personal information of the Defendant on the ground that the Defendant is a child or juvenile. The proviso to Article 49(1) and the proviso to Article 50(1) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse provides that “Where the Defendant is a child or juvenile, or where the Defendant is a child or juvenile, or where there are other special circumstances that may not disclose personal information,” the lower court’s determination appears to be in accordance with the application of the above provision, and even if the prosecutor considers all other circumstances asserted in the trial, it cannot be said that the first instance court’s determination is erroneous, as otherwise alleged by the prosecutor. The Prosecutor’s allegation in this part is without merit.

3) Determination as to the Defendant’s assertion of unfair employment restriction order

The Defendant’s crime constitutes a sex offense against children, juveniles, and adults and, in principle, should issue an employment restriction order with a child or juvenile-related institution, etc. in accordance with the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes. In light of the Defendant’s age, status, risk of re-offending, circumstances and methods of committing the crime, circumstances after the crime, the effect of preventing sexual crimes that may be achieved by the employment restriction order, etc., it is difficult to deem that there are special circumstances that the Defendant would not restrict employment against the Defendant, and it is difficult to view that the period is too unreasonable. Thus, this part of the Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

C. As to Defendant E

1) Determination on the assertion of unfair sentencing by both parties

The crime of this case is not very good because the defendant paid virtual currency to Co-Defendant A, participated in the production and distribution of sexual exploitation in BN bank and BF bank, distributed it in accordance with the orders of Co-Defendant A, participated in the production by proposing the content of sexual exploitation, and possessed child or juvenile pornography secured in the process. The defendant did not have to pay support payments exceeding KRW 00,000 in order to acquire sexual exploitation. As there were consumers of sexual exploitation such as the defendant, Co-Defendant A was able to systematically and commercialized and commercialized the production and distribution of sexual exploitation together with many participants. Furthermore, the defendant merely takes part in the production and distribution of sexual exploitation together with other members beyond purchasing or acquiring sexual exploitation, and it is not clear that it itself is unlawful, and that it contributed to the production and distribution of sexual exploitation in addition to the criminal act of Co-Defendant A, thereby extending the cause of the crime of this case as if it contributed to the operation of the organization.

On the other hand, the circumstances that the defendant was the first offender without criminal punishment and did not produce sexual exploitation video products by directly threatening or coercion the victims, the circumstances that the defendant could not withdraw easily because he provided personal information to co-defendant A, should be considered in light of the circumstances favorable to the defendant.

The first instance court may not be deemed to have determined punishment in full view of the following circumstances: (a) the sentence of the first instance court cannot be deemed to be too somewhat less or unreasonable than reasonable sentencing discretion, considering all of the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive and circumstance of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, including the fact that the Defendant was at the latest close, understanding the victims’ suffering, and reflects the seriousness of the crime of this case; and (b) the Defendant divorced to and divorced from his spouse and the Defendant was set at the company; and (c) the Defendant was set at the company. This part of the Defendant and the Prosecutor’s assertion is without merit.

2) Determination as to the prosecutor’s improper assertion of exemption from disclosure and notification of personal information

The first instance court determined, based on the circumstances stated in its holding, that there are special circumstances in which the Defendant’s personal information should not be disclosed or notified, and did not issue an order to disclose or notify the Defendant’s information. In full view of the contents and records of the arguments in this case, the first instance court’s judgment is acceptable even if the prosecutor considered all the circumstances asserted in the trial, and it cannot be said that there were errors as argued by the prosecutor. Accordingly, the prosecutor’s assertion on this part

3) Determination as to the Defendant’s assertion of unfair employment restriction order

The defendant's crime constitutes a sex offense against children, juveniles, and adults and should, in principle, issue an employment restriction order with a child or juvenile-related institution, etc. in accordance with the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes. In light of the defendant's age, occupation, risk of crime, process and method of crime, circumstances after the crime, sexual crime that the defendant was admitted due to the employment restriction order, the disadvantage of the defendant caused by the employment restriction order, and the preventive effects of sexual crime that can be achieved thereby, it is difficult to see that there are special circumstances that the defendant should not be restricted from employment, and the defendant's assertion on this part is not reasonable because the period is too long.

D. As to Defendant F

1) Determination on the assertion of unfair sentencing by both parties

The crime of this case is not very good because the defendant paid virtual currency to Co-Defendant A, participated in the production and distribution of sexual exploitation in BN bank and BF bank, etc., distributed it in accordance with A's instructions, participated in production by proposing the content of sexual exploitation, and possessed child or juvenile pornography secured in the process. The defendant did not have to pay support payments exceeding a number of million won in order to acquire sexual exploitation. As there were consumers of the same sexual exploitation as the defendant, Co-Defendant A was able to organize and commercialize the production and distribution of sexual exploitation together with many participants. The defendant merely takes part in the production and distribution of sexual exploitation together with other members beyond purchasing or acquiring sexual exploitation, and the defendant is not only unlawful in itself, but also is not a crime of this case that has extended the reason of the crime of this case by contributing to the operation of the organization by following the crime of Co-Defendant A.

On the other hand, the circumstances that the defendant was the first offender without criminal punishment and did not produce sexual exploitation video products by directly threatening or coercion the victims, the circumstances that the defendant could not withdraw easily because he provided personal information to co-defendant A, should be considered in light of the circumstances favorable to the defendant.

The first instance court, taking into account all of the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive and background of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc., considered that the sentence of the first instance court is too unfavorable or unreasonable beyond the reasonable sentencing discretion, and it is acceptable to view that the Defendant and the Prosecutor’s allegation in this part is without merit, in light of the following: (a) the Defendant began to commit the crime of this case in the first instance court; (b) the importance of the crime of this case was at the latest closed; and (c) understanding and reflecting the suffering of victims; and (d) the fact that there is a strong social ties relationship with each other; and (b) the support among his family members is well-grounded.

2) Determination as to the prosecutor’s improper assertion of exemption from disclosure and notification of personal information

The first instance court determined, based on the circumstances stated in its holding, that there are special circumstances in which the disclosure of the personal information of the defendant should not be disclosed, and did not issue an order to disclose or notify the defendant's information to the public. In full view of the contents and records of the arguments in this case, even if the prosecutor considers all the circumstances asserted in the trial, the court below's judgment is acceptable, and it cannot be said that there were errors as argued by the prosecutor. Accordingly, the prosecutor'

E. As to Defendant C (the part regarding the claim for attachment order)

In light of the Defendant’s violent tendency, etc., the prosecutor asserts that the risk of re-offending has deteriorated, and that if the relevant law is amended to extend the attachment period of an electronic device in the trial, it is necessary to add the attachment period to the Defendant. On the other hand, the Defendant asserts that the attachment order of the lower court is unfair or excessive.

The court below held that the defendant's risk of repeating the crime was high considering the fact that he has continued to threaten retaliations to kill the victim and his family members, and that the defendant has reached the preliminary stage of murder based on labor union, frightness, redness, etc. for the victim, and that the result of the evaluation of the defendant's adult recidivism risk assessment is about 17 points in total, and that the result of the evaluation of the adult recidivism risk assessment of the defendant is about 18 points in total, but the result of the evaluation of the sexual recidivism risk of the defendant is about 18 points in total.

Based on the arguments and evidence of this case, the court below’s aforementioned determination is just and acceptable, and considering all the circumstances such as the period of attachment under Article 9(1) of the Act on the Attachment, etc. of Electronic Devices (limited to 10 years) and the seriousness of the crime of this case, the defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, etc., as well as the period of attachment under Article 9(1) of the Act on the Attachment, etc. of Electronic Devices (limited to the extension of the above period until the judgment of the court below is rendered).

Therefore, this part of the prosecutor and the defendant's argument is without merit.

5. Judgment on the prosecutor's appeal against the rejection of prosecution as stated in the judgment of the court below

Of the facts charged against Defendant A, the lower court sentenced Defendant A to the dismissal of prosecution on the ground that each victim expressed his/her wish not to punish each of the Defendant after institution of the instant prosecution. The prosecutor filed an appeal, stating that the scope of the appeal is in full the judgment of the first instance court while filing an appeal, and subsequently dismissed each of the above intimidation. However, the prosecutor did not state the grounds for appeal on this part in the petition of appeal or the appellate brief submitted by the prosecutor, nor did there exist grounds for reversal ex officio on the record.

Therefore, this part of the appeal by the prosecutor is without merit.

6. Conclusion

A. The dismissed part

Of the judgment of the court below, the appeal by the prosecutor on the dismissed part of the judgment of the court below and the appeal by the prosecutor on the defendant C and the defendant B, E, and F concerning the request for attachment order against the defendant C is without merit, and each appeal by the above defendants and the prosecutor is dismissed pursuant to Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act (Provided, That part of the facts constituting the crime of the judgment of the court of the court below of the first instance is corrected as

B. Judgment of the court below

The part of the judgment of the court below on the first instance against Defendant A, C, and D, with the exception of the part on which partial dismissal of prosecution is dismissed, and the part on the case on which the attachment order against Defendant C is requested, and the judgment of the court below on the second instance, and there is a ground for reversal of facts and misapprehension of legal principles as seen above. Accordingly, with respect to Defendant A, C, and D, it is reversed pursuant to Article 364(2) and (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act without further determining the remaining grounds for appeal by the above Defendants

[Judgment on Defendant A, C, and D (excluding the dismissed part of the judgment of the court below and the part on the claim for attachment order against Defendant C)]

Criminal facts, facts constituting the attachment order, and summary of evidence

The facts of the crime recognized by this court, the facts constituting the cause of the attachment order, and the summary of the evidence thereof are as follows, and except for the part that "the facts constituting the attachment order against the defendant C and the danger of recidivism as indicated in the judgment," the corresponding columns of the judgment of the court of first and second instance shall be cited pursuant to Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act (including the list of crimes listed in the judgment of the court below 1 and 2).

[Attachment]

○ The 11th and 5th of the judgment of the first instance, and the 7th and 5th of the judgment of the second instance, respectively, shall be amended to “AR Bank” (Small-Scale Group Bank).

○○ 11th page 19 of the judgment of the first instance and 7th page 19 of the judgment of the second instance and 7th page 19 of the judgment of the second instance, each state, “AR bank” was set up in the “AR bank,” respectively, in terms of a small group of “BF” rooms. The above two rooms are different from the time of establishment, the terms and conditions of accession, and the degree of organizing, but the term “AR bank” is to be used to the meaning of referring to a small group of AK banks.

○ 12 pages 6 of the judgment of the court of first instance and 8 of the judgment of the court of second instance, each of the 6 pages 8 of the judgment of the court of second instance and 6 of the 8th page 6 of the judgment of the court of second instance deleted the “AR grade is a position where only the participants above the AR level are admitted,” (AR grade was not a requirement

○○ The 13th page 13 of the original judgment, and the 9th page 12 of the second sentence, respectively, shall be amended to “BE”.

The part of the judgment of the court below of 14 pages 14, 5, 9, and 10, 4 of the last 14th 14th 1st eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth 9 of the judgment of the court of 2nd eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth e.

○ 14 pages 9 and 10 pages 8 of the judgment of the court of first instance, each “AR bank, etc.” shall be deleted.

The part of the judgment of the court below of first instance, 14, 13, 15, 16, and 10, 12, 11, 15, 14, 14, 14, 14, 14, 14, 14, 14, 14, 14, 14, and 15, is changed to the following: "There is no special restriction, but, in the case of some participants who provided personal information to A, there is a fear of fear that

○ The 16th 10th 10th 16th 10th 10th 12th 9th 12th 12th 12th 2th 200 each amendment to “AR”.

○ The first instance judgment’s 18th 6th 6th 6th 9th 9th 14th 5th 8th 8th 14th 14th 14th 8th 2th 200.

○ 제1 원심판결문 18면 12행부터 14행까지, 15행부터 17행까지의 각 "피고인 D, BG, 성명불상(①) 성명불상(8), 성명불상(⑨), 성명불상(12), 성명불상(23), 성명불상(24), 성명불상(25), 성명불상(26), 성명불상(27)"을 "성명불상(①) 등"으로 변경하고, 제2 원심판결문 14면 11행의 "D, BG"을 "성명불상(①)"로 변경하고, 12행부터 13행까지의 "D, BG, 성명불상(①), 성명불상(⑧), 성명불상(⑨), 성명불상(12), 성명불상(23), 성명불상(24), 성명불상 (25), 성명불상(26), 성명불상(27)"을 "성명불상(①) 등으로 변경하며, 제1 원심판결문 18면 17행, 제2 원심판결문 14면 16행의 각 "'AK방'의 AR등급 이상 구성원들의 모임인 'BE'라는 Q 그룹에 모여"를 "BH을 이용하여 등급제를 시행하고 AR등급 이상 구성원들의 모임인 'BE'를 개설하여 AK방을 체계적으로 관리하는 등"으로 변경하고, 제1 원심판결문 18면 20행, 제2 원심판결문 14면 17행의 각 "강제추행", 제1원심판결문 19면 4행의 "(일명 CA)"를 각 삭제한다('BE 구성원'들이 '강제추행'을 목적으로 범죄집단을 조직하였다고 단정하기 어렵고, 'CA'는 당시 사용되던 용어가 아니다).

○ 23. 2. 2. 2. 2. 3. 2. 2. 3. 6. 2. 2. .. .. .. ... ... ...

After the 27th page 5 of the judgment of the court of first instance, "the joining and activities of Defendant D's criminal group" is added, and 4.e. (1)(b) is added to the facts of the crime as described in paragraph 2(2).

Application of Statutes

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

○ 피고인 A: 형법 제114조, 구 아동·청소년의 성보호에 관한 법률(2020. 6. 2. 법률 제17338호로 개정되기 전의 것, 이하 '구 아동·청소년의 성보호에 관한 법률'이라고만 한다) 제11조 제1항, 제2항, 구 성폭력범죄의 처벌 등에 관한 특례법(2020. 5. 19. 법률 제17264호로 개정되기 전의 것, 이하 '구 성폭력범죄의 처벌 등에 관한 특례법'이라고만 한다) 제14조 제3항, 제2항(범죄집단 조직 및 활동의 점, 포괄하여 15)), 각 구 아동·청소년의 성보호에 관한 법률 제11조 제1항, 형법 제30조(아동·청소년이용음란물 제작의 점, 피해자별로 포괄하여), 각 아동·청소년의 성보호에 관한 법률 제7조 제3항, 형법 제298조, 제30조, 제34조 제1항, 제31조 제1항(간접정범에 의한 아동·청소년 강제추행의 점, 피해자별로 포괄하여), 각 구 아동·청소년의 성보호에 관한 법률 제11조 제2항, 형법 제30조(영리목적 아동·청소년이용음란물 배포의 점, 피해자별로 포괄하여), 각 구 성폭력범죄의 처벌 등에 관한 특례법 제14조 제3항, 제2항, 형법 제30조(영리목적 촬영물 반포의 점, 피해자별로 포괄하여), 각 아동복지법 제71조 제1항 제1의2호, 제17조 제2호, 형법 제30조(아동음행강요 등의 점, 피해자별로 포괄하여), 각 형법 제347조 제1항, 제30조(사기의 점, 피해자별로 포괄하여), 각 형법 제352조, 제347조 제1항, 제30조(사기미수의 점, 피해자별로 포괄하여), 각 개인정보보호법 제71조 제5호, 제59조 제2호(개인정보 취득의 점), 각 형법 제324조 제1항, 제30조(강요의 점), 각 형법 제324조 의5, 제324조 제1항, 제30조(강요미수의 점), 각 마약류 관리에 관한 법률 제62조 제1항 제4호, 제3조 제12호, 제30조(마약판매 광고의 점), 아동·청소년의 성보호에 관한 법률 제7조 제6항, 제1항, 제30조(아동·청소년 강간 미수의 점), 아동·청소년의 성보호에 관한 법률 제7조 제2항 제1호, 제2호, 제30조(아동·청소년 유사강간의 점), 각 형법 제298조, 제30조, 제34조 제1항, 제31조 제1항(간접정범에 의한 강제추행의 점, 피해자별로 포괄하여), 형법 제156조(무고의 점), 각 형법 제283조 제1항, 제30조(협박의 점), 범죄수익은닉의 규제 및 처벌 등에 관한 법률 제3조 제1항 제1호, 형법 제30조(범죄수익 가장의 점, 포괄하여), 범죄수익은닉의 규제 및 처벌 등에 관한 법률 제3조 제1항 제3호, 형법 제30조(범죄수익 은닉의 점, 포괄하여), 형법 제297조의2, 제30조(유사강간의 점), 각 구 아동·청소년의 성보호에 관한 법률 제11조 제5항(아동·청소년 이용음란물 소지의 점, 각 정보통신망 이용촉진 및 정보보호 등에 관한 법률 제70조 제2항(허위사실 적시 명예훼손의 점, 형법 제311조(모욕의 점)

Defendant C: Article 114 of the Criminal Act; Article 11(1) and (2) of the former Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes; Article 14(3) and (2) of the former Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (hereinafter collectively referred to as “criminal group”); Article 11(1) of the former Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse; Article 30 of the Criminal Act; Article 71(1)1-2 and Article 17 subparag. 2 of the Child Welfare Act; Article 30 of the Criminal Act; Article 11(2) of the former Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse; Article 30 of the Criminal Act; Article 14(3) and (2) of the former Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes; Article 30 of the former Act on the Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes; Article 25(1) and (3) of the Criminal Act on the Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes; Article 30(1) of the Criminal Act on comprehensive Punishment, Article 30(1)

Defendant D: Article 114 of the Criminal Act; Article 11(1) and (2) of the former Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes; Article 14(3) and (2) of the former Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse; Article 324(1) of the Criminal Act; Articles 324-5 and 324(1) of the former Criminal Act; Article 11(1) of the former Act on Special Cases Concerning the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (amended by Act No. 1065, Apr. 1, 200; Article 11(3) and (4) of the former Act on Special Cases Concerning the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Crimes (amended by Act No. 1065, Apr. 1, 200; Article 111(1) of the former Act on Special Cases Concerning the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (amended by Act No. 14); Article 7 of the former Act on the Protection of Child and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse

1. Commercial competition;

Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act

Defendant A: Punishment on the violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (production, distribution, etc. of obscene materials), violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (Indecent Act by compulsion), violation of the Child and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (indecent act by compulsion, sexual harassment, etc. against children), and punishment on the violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (indecent act against children), which is the most severe punishment.

Defendant C: Punishment on the crimes of violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (production, distribution, etc. of obscenity), violation of the Child Welfare Act (mediate compulsion, sexual harassment, etc. against children), and punishment on the crimes of more severe 'violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (production, Distribution, etc. of obscenity)'

1. Selection of punishment;

With respect to the crime of organization of a criminal organization, crime of joining a criminal organization, crime of joining a criminal organization, crime of violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (Rape), crime of violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (production, distribution, etc. of obscene materials), crime of imprisonment, fraud, attempted fraud, crime of violation of the Personal Information Protection Act, crime of coercion, attempted coercion, crime of coercion, attempted indecent act, crime of indecent act, crime of indecent act, crime of violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (production, distribution, etc. of obscene materials), violation of the Child and Juveniles against Child Protection Act (production, distribution, etc. of obscene materials), violation of the Child and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse Act (violation of sex), violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes under the Act on the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Violation of the Act on the Protection of Narcotics, etc. from Sexual Abuse), violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (production, distribution, etc. of obscene materials), violation of the Act.

1. Aggravation of repeated crimes (Defendant C);

Articles 35 and proviso of Article 42 of the Criminal Act

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

○ Defendant A: The former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act [Aggravation of concurrent crimes with punishment provided for in the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse, which is the most severe punishment and punishment]

○ Defendant C: The punishment provided for in the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act (aggravating concurrent crimes within the scope of the proviso of Article 42 of the Criminal Act as provided for in the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (production, Distribution, etc. of obscenity) with the largest punishment

○ Defendant D: The punishment and the punishment provided for in the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of each Criminal Act [Aggravation of concurrent crimes with the punishment provided for in the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (production, Distribution, etc. of obscenity)]

1. Order to complete programs;

○ Defendant A (Non-Imposition of Order of Completion)

The proviso to Article 21(3) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse, the proviso to Article 16(3) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (the defendant is subject to an order to complete a program pursuant to Article 9-2(1)4 of the Act on the Electronic Monitoring, etc. of Electronic Devices

○ Defendant C, and D (Imposition of Dual Orders)

The main sentence of Article 21(2) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse, the main sentence of Article 16(2) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment of Sexual Crimes

1. An order for disclosure and notification;

Articles 47(1) and 49(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes, the main sentence of Article 49(1) and Article 50(1) of the former Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (Amended by Act No. 16622, Nov. 26, 2019); the main sentence of Article 50(1) [limited to each violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse; the violation of the Child and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse Act; the violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Act on the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes; the violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (obscenity using a telecommunications medium); the violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse; the violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual

1. An employment restriction order;

○ Defendant A, D

Article 2 of the Addenda to the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (Act No. 16622, Nov. 26, 2019); Article 56(1) of the former Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (Amended by Act No. 1738, Jun. 2, 2020); the main text of Article 59-3(1) of the Act on Welfare of Persons with Disabilities

○ Defendant C.

Article 2 of the Addenda to the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (Act No. 16622, Nov. 26, 2019); Article 56(1) of the former Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (Amended by Act No. 1738, Jun. 2, 2020); Article 59-3(1) main text of the Welfare of Disabled Persons Act; Article 2 of the Addenda to the Child Welfare Act (Act No. 17206, Apr. 7, 2020); Articles 29-3(1) and 3-7-2(b) of the Child Welfare Act

1. Imposition of orders to attach location tracking devices and matters to be observed (Defendant A);

Article 5(1)3 and 4, Article 9(2), Article 9(1)17), Article 5(1)2 and 3, Article 9-2(1)2, 3, 4, and 6

1. Confiscation;

○ Defendant A

Article 48(1)1 and 2 of the Criminal Act; Article 8(1) of the Act on Regulation and Punishment of Concealment of Criminal Proceeds

○ Defendant C.

Article 48(1)1 and 2 of the Criminal Act

○ Defendant D

Article 48 (1) 1 of the Criminal Act

1. Collection (Defendant A);

Article 48(1)2 and (2) of the Criminal Act; Articles 10(1) and 8(1) of the Act on Regulation and Punishment of Concealment of Criminal Proceeds

Registration of personal information (the defendants)

Where a conviction becomes final and conclusive for a sex offense subject to registration of personal information among the crimes in each judgment, the above Defendants are subject to registration of personal information pursuant to Article 42 (1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes, and therefore they are obligated to submit personal information to the competent agency pursuant to Article 43

On the other hand, the period for registering personal information of the above defendants is 30 years in accordance with Article 45 (1) 1 and (2) of the same Act. In full view of the above sex crimes subject to registration in the holding that causes the registration of personal information, the nature of the remaining crimes, severity of crimes, etc., the period for registering personal information in accordance with Article 45 (4) of the same Act should not be determined as a short-term period than the period according to the sentence of sentence. Thus, the period for registering personal information should not be shortened.

Reasons for sentencing

1. Defendant A

Before reaching the commission of the instant crime, the Defendant knew of the 'Singishing Criminal Code', and tried to cooperate with the police in the investigation, and to arrest the criminal organization. In this case, the Defendant came to know of the ecosystem of the criminal organization (including call centers, cash books, books in charge of large passbooks, books in charge of withdrawals, book withdrawals, and sunsing, etc.) and caused the Defendant to think of money punishment by referring to the “Xs” articles and selling obscene materials for obscenitys.

For this purpose, the Defendant organized a so-called “AK organization” crime, and took part in the role of the members of the victims of the crime, produced sexual exploitations by inducing and threatening many victims in various ways, and distributed them over a long time, and ordered a third party to directly rape the victims of the crime. The Defendant, taking a lot of profits through the above crime, made a variety of sexual crimes into nature, such as recreation distance, and continued to attract participants to participate in the distribution of video products, and made a structure that has no choice but to accumulate and reflect the victims’ damage. In particular, the Defendant, by disclosing the personal name and sexual exploitation of many victims to the public interest service personnel so that they could not recover from victims, was additionally exposed to damage resulting from the crime. In addition, the Defendant did not obey the victim’s rights by deceiving the victims of the crime, and did not have any doubt about whether there was any serious harm to the victims of the crime, and the Defendant did not have been forced to commit an abnormal act and forced sale of the victims.

However, in light of the fact that the defendant has not been subject to criminal punishment so far, and that the purpose of the punishment is to punish the defendant and to prevent the crimes corresponding to the crime committed by him/herself through the punishment, as well as to promote correction and edification on behalf of the defendant himself/herself as a human being, it cannot be ruled out that the possibility that his/her personality and behavior will be corrected and remodeled through a long-term convict life for the defendant as a human being. In addition, with the efforts of the father of the defendant, the defendant agreed with some victims at the time of the first and the second trial, and agreed additionally with some victims (four persons) even at the time of the trial. Such circumstances may be considered somewhat or as favorable to the defendant.

On the other hand, the judgment of the court below on the sentencing of the first and second cases shall be respected, while the two cases are combined at the appellate court, and one sentence should be imposed within the scope of the provision of concurrent crimes under the Criminal Act, the defendant was additionally indicted due to the crime of indecent act by compulsion related to the case in the recent years, and the judgment is being held earlier, and the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, the circumstances after the crime, etc. shall be considered, and the punishment shall be determined as per the disposition.

2. Defendant C.

(a) Scope of applicable sentences under law: Imprisonment with prison labor for up to 50 years;

B. The scope of recommendations based on the sentencing guidelines: The sentencing guidelines are not set for offenses against the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (production, distribution, etc. of obscene materials), joining a criminal organization, and activities, etc. against which the most severe punishment is imposed. Therefore, the sentencing guidelines are not applied

(c) Determination of sentence;

The crime of this case was committed by Co-Defendant A while being aware that he operated a AK organization, thereby participating in the crime of this case, concealing criminal proceeds according to the crime of the A, etc. A, and preparing murder against the victim. The Defendant was aware of the criminal group organized by A while performing the role of inducing the victims of sexual exploitation while leading to the occurrence of multiple children and juveniles. Moreover, the Defendant was sentenced to punishment by habitually threatening the victims even prior to murder, and was punished by intimidation against the same victim even before the preparation for murder. Furthermore, the Defendant attempted to murder the victim of the above victim while referring to the victim’s family. In light of the Defendant’s period, contents, and degree of risk of growing growth, etc., the crime related to the victim is very heavy. The victim did not engage in normal life with the care of the Defendant, such as the name and the director of the board of directors, etc., and the Defendant complained of considerable pain in the long time. Even though the Defendant did not have to make any more retaliation against the victim, the Defendant did not have to do so even if having known the victim’s and the child care center.

Therefore, it is necessary to strictly punish defendants and isolate them from society for a considerable period of time.

On the other hand, in light of the fact that the Defendant was subject to drug treatment for a long time under the diagnosis of an excessive disorder, and that it seems necessary to provide mental therapy in the future, it seems that the above circumstances are somewhat affected by the Defendant’s criminal act even if they are not recognized as a mental disorder. The Defendant appears not to have committed a criminal act with a conclusive criminal intent against a crime committed by a group of crimes called “AK Organization,” which is a "AK Organization," but to have been committed a criminal act in favor of the Defendant. These points need to be considered in light of the circumstances favorable to the Defendant.

In addition, comprehensively taking into account the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, the circumstances after the crime was committed, etc., the punishment shall be determined as ordered.

3. Defendant D.

(a) Scope of applicable sentences under law: Imprisonment with prison labor for up to five years up to 45 years;

B. The scope of recommendations based on the sentencing criteria: The sentencing criteria shall not apply since the sentencing criteria are not set on the offenses of violating the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (production, distribution, etc. of obscene materials) against which the punishment is the most severe, and the offense of organization of

(c) Determination of sentence;

Before joining the AK Bank Organization, the Defendant had access to the victims of ageed by means of water similar to A, taken sex-related images or received sexual exploitations, etc., and transmitted letters that require a sense of sexual humiliation or recommended sexual traffic. The Defendant did not have much number of victims due to individual criminal acts, but the victims suffered significant mental damage due to the instant crime.

Furthermore, until the beginning of the 'AK' created, the Defendant continued to engage in active activities in AK and contributed to the activation and maintenance of a crime group, and possessed a large number of children and juveniles pornography, including video works secured in the process. In particular, the Defendant has a greater possibility of criticism in that he/she continues to commit the above crimes while in office as a public official.

However, there was no criminal history on the part of the Defendant, and agreed with some victims. The Defendant’s activities in the AK room are not to run up to the crime of organization of a criminal group, but to the extent that it does not seem to have engaged in specific criminal acts by the other Defendants in terms of collective activities after joining the crime group, and thus, it does not have a relatively specific role allocation or degree of participation. Such circumstances may be considered as somewhat favorable to the Defendant.

In addition, comprehensively taking into account the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, the circumstances after the crime was committed, etc., the punishment shall be determined as ordered.

The acquittal portion

The primary facts charged regarding Defendant D’s organization of a crime group are as stated in Article 3-1(a) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and this shall be pronounced not guilty pursuant to the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, as it falls under the case where there is no proof of criminal facts as stated in Article 3-3(b) of the above Act. However, as long as it is found guilty of the conjunctive facts charged regarding the joining and activities of a crime group in the relation

Judges Doesopop

Judges Park Young-chul

Judges Hwang Sung-sung

1) Although the grounds for appeal are not clear, the arguments of the defendant are broad.

2) The term “accom group or room, etc., operated by Defendant A for the purpose of sharing sexual exploitation images produced by Defendant A.”

3) Not more than 3) The number of pages means the number of pages recorded in the case 2020No2178, except in particular, and where necessary, the number of cases in the first instance shall be recorded.

4) In the course of operation of Q Group, it is a program that has the function to put the end of personnel when entering the room, add a grade, add a notice, or put or put a notice into a public notice.

5) The victim of the instant case or the Defendant A seems to have thought that the relevant victim was his/her female-friendly behavior.

6) The victim (LA) was investigated and corrected after the date and time of the first crime that was stated at the time of the police’s initial statement according to the police’s objective provision of data.

7) All of the grounds of appeal against the judgment of the court below Nos. 1 and 2 against the defendant C are the purport that the relationship with the defendant A, etc. shall be denied because the defendant C does not have the awareness of the objective sign that constitutes the elements of crime with respect to the operation of the defendant AK.

8) Although Defendant D alleged that he withdrawn from the AK on October 26, 2019, Defendant D used “NA” in the account from around September 2019 to around October 26, 2019, and stated that he used “NB” account from around October 2019 to the time of arrest from around October 26, 2019 (Evidence 20, 2020, 145, 2021-236 evidence records, 1018, 2019, 2020, 1018, 26, 2019, 2020, 16, 16, 587, 16, 16, 206, 200, 206, 206, 206, 200, 206, 206, 206, 200, 200).

9) The process of collecting evidence through separate recovery, search and analysis that results in the original or copy of the storage medium.

10) Creation of a single file whose composition and arrangement of the original storage medium and the electronic information is identical;

11) If the fact that a separate evidence related to the facts of the crime was discovered is insufficient to search information related to the facts of the crime of the first warrant already issued, it would be unreasonable to suspend the investigation based on the first warrant due to unexpected circumstances.

12) If the request for a warrant is not stated to the minimum extent to specify the facts constituting an offense, there is a problem of expanding the scope of the crime or the object of the search and seizure as a "a color and search warrant" or "a comprehensive warrant", and there is also a possibility that the request for a warrant may be dismissed for this reason.

13) The criminal data of the same or similar kind can be used as circumstantial evidence, such as single comprehensive crime or habitual crime, or data that can confirm the motive, method, etc. of crime.

14) As seen earlier, Defendant A, C, and D need to render a new decision on the grounds of ex officio reversal, and thus, they do not make a separate decision on unfair sentencing.

15) The organization or joining of a criminal organization is scheduled to act as a member of a criminal organization regardless of the commission of a criminal act, and its activities as a member of a criminal organization are naturally premised on the formation or joining of a criminal organization. As such, both parties can recognize the unity and continuity of the criminal’s criminal intent in that it constitutes a series of preliminary and conspiracy processes for the formation, continuation, and maintenance of the criminal organization, and that it constitutes a series of criminal act. Therefore, it is reasonable to deem that the organization of a criminal organization or a member thereof is in the relationship of a single comprehensive crime (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do7081, Sept. 10, 2015).

16) As a result of the amendment by Act No. 16923 on February 4, 2020, the title of the law was changed from "Act on Probation and Electronic Monitoring, etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders" to "Act on Electronic Monitoring, etc. of Electronic Devices". The provisions below, despite the aforementioned amendment, did not specifically change the contents thereof.

17) The lower limit of the period of attachment under the main sentence of Article 9(1) and 1 of the Electronic Monitoring, etc. Act is at least 10 years, or a sexual crime is committed against a person under the age of 19 years. Therefore, pursuant to the proviso to Article 9(1) of the same Act, the lower limit is aggravated by twice pursuant to the said proviso. Therefore, the period of attachment under Article 9(2) of the same Act is between 20 and 45 years.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.