In a case where the defendant, who is a high school teacher, was prosecuted for violating the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse and the Personal Information Protection Act on the ground that he/she used personal information to send or send a certificate of content to his/her parents using his/her personal information while referring to three victims of a class where he/she is in charge of the defendant's gathering that he/she will not be able to do so on the face of the male student, such as "I will not be able to do so on the face of the male son?" and "I will not see why you will see?" and rhumbling his/her body, he/she gets tight, huming his/her string, drawing him/her into double arms, and contacted with each other.

In a case where the defendant, who is a high school teacher, was prosecuted for violating the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse and the Personal Information Protection Act on the ground that he/she used personal information from the victim's personal information for any purpose other than the purpose of sending or requesting the victim a certificate of contents to his/her parents, the case holding that the defendant's act of using the victim's statement constitutes an indecent act against the victim's sexual harassment or sexual harassment in light of the following: (a) the victim's act of using the victim's statements was committed in a manner other than sending or sending a certificate of contents to the victim's parents; (b) the victim's act of using the victim's statements was legitimate and detailed; and (c) the victim's act of using the victim's statements was committed with the victim's testimony at school; and (d) the victim's act of using the victim's false statements was committed in a manner that it is difficult to see that it constitutes an indecent act against the victim's sexual behavior or sexual harassment; and (d) the victim's testimony or sexual behavior was committed.

Articles 20 and 298 of the Criminal Act; Article 7(3) and (5) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse; Article 19 and Article 71 subparag. 2 of the Personal Information Protection Act

Defendant

The grandchildren et al. and one other

Law Firm Cho et al.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 20,000,000.

When the defendant fails to pay the above fine, the defendant shall be confined in a workhouse for the period converted into one day.

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

In order to order the provisional payment of an amount equivalent to the above fine.

1. Violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse;

The Defendant, from March 2016 to November 201 of the same year, was willing to commit an indecent act against students by using the fact that (title 1 omitted) high school located in Ansan-si from March 2016 to November 1, 200, works as a teacher, and that even if the Defendant committed an indecent act against students, students with the aged who are deprived and aged are likely to suffer disadvantages in school life and sexual evaluation, and thus, it is difficult for them to refuse or resist their behavior

A. Crimes against the victim non-indicted 1 (a person, a person, and a person aged 17)

1) Around May 2016, the Defendant, who is located in Ansan-si ( Address 1 omitted), 301 at (Name 1 omitted) High School High School 301 where the Defendant works as a teacher in front of the Defendant, she seated in the victim’s side where the public book is being held, and “I am her love in lieu of male-gu, and if there is no male-gu, I am her seat?” The Defendant put his hand on the shoulder, and pushed his body over his seat on the neck.

2) On June 2016, the Defendant: (a) at the above high school school teaching room, the Defendant stated that “The other patriotic neighbors are fluored, and why is why you do not fluor?”; and (b) applied the hand to the shoulder of the victim and pushed the body close to the victim.”

3) On July 2016, the Defendant: (a) at the school office of the high school around July 2016, the Defendant: (b) at the school office of the high school, the victim was in a good attitude during the class hours; and (c) rhym the victim’s hand with his hand, and (d) carried the victim’s left shoulder with his hand.

4) On August 2016, the Defendant: (a) used the opportunity for the victim’s friendships to get married at the training room at the above high school 302 Police Officers; and (b) used the opportunity for the victim’s friendships to get married to the convenience store; (c) used the victim’s f

B. Crimes against the victim non-indicted 2 (a life, leisure, 18 years old)

Around September 2016, the Defendant: (a) went back to the back of the classroom, which entered the back of the classroom to make a religious order after completing the class at the high school; (b) and (c) started the head of the Defendant in contact with the head of the victim; and (d) contacted the Defendant’s view on the part of the victim.

C. Crimes against the victim Nonindicted 3 (a person, a person, and a person aged 18)

At the above high school practice room in 2016, the Defendant: (a) told the victim, who was a self-student student, to sit in the side fright of the victim; (b) talked that “I have come to know about the extension; (c) I have come to know about the victim; (d) I have come to contact with the victim’s view.”

Accordingly, the defendant committed an indecent act against the victims of children and juveniles by force.

2. Violation of the Personal Information Protection Act

The Defendant, from November 18, 2016 to November 18, 2016, failed to perform his duties as a teacher in charge of the above high school due to the investigation under paragraph (1).

A. On December 12, 2016, the Defendant sent to the post office (name 2 omitted) located in Ansan-si ( Address 2 omitted), a certificate of content containing parents’ apologys between parents and students’ apologys to the address of Non-Indicted 4, Non-Indicted 5, Non-Indicted 6, Non-Indicted 7, and Non-Indicted 8, using a certified resident registration card that was received from the students as a temporary teacher, using the Defendant’s address in advance.

B. On December 2016, 2016, the Defendant, at Nonindicted 9’s office delegated by the Defendant in Daegu Suwon-gu ( Address 3 omitted), informed the said parents of the address while entrusting the dispatch of content certification to the parents listed in subparagraph 2(A).

Accordingly, the Defendant used information for purposes other than the purpose of receiving personal information from a personal information manager.

1. Each legal statement of the witness, Nonindicted 1, Nonindicted 2, Nonindicted 3, Nonindicted 6, and Nonindicted 7

1. Each prosecutor’s statement on Nonindicted 1, 2, and 3

1. Each video CD or stenographic record;

1. Each written statement of Nonindicted 1, 2, and 3

1. Investigation report (proof of contents sent to victims, etc., use of victims' addresses, attaching personal information documents);

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

Article 7(5) and (3) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse, Article 298 of the Criminal Act (Indecent Conduct against Juveniles' Force, Selection of Fines), Article 71 Subparag. 2 and Article 19 of the Personal Information Protection Act (Involving Use of Personal Information for Other Purposes, Selection of Fines)

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

Article 37 (former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act [Aggravation of concurrent crimes resulting from a violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (Indecent Act, etc.)]

1. Detention in a workhouse;

Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act

1. Order to complete programs;

The main sentence of Article 21(2) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse

1. Order of provisional payment;

Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. Exemption from an order for disclosure and notification;

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 (the fact that there is no criminal history against the defendant; the defendant's age, occupation, family environment and social relation; the details, circumstances, and result of the crime in this case; the prevention of sexual crimes subject to registration that may be achieved due to the disclosure or notification order; the protection effect of the victim; and the degree of disadvantage and anticipated side effects of the defendant's entry due to the disclosure or notification order; it is deemed that there are special circumstances in which the defendant's personal information should not be disclosed or notified).

Where a conviction of a criminal facts in the judgment becomes final and conclusive, the defendant is a person 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 is obligated to submit personal information to the competent agency pursuant to Article 43 of the same Act.

1. Summary of the defendant's assertion

The Defendant did not commit an indecent act, such as the entry in paragraph (1) of the facts charged. The Defendant acknowledged the fact that the Defendant committed an act listed in paragraph (2) of the facts charged, but this constitutes a legitimate act under Article 20 of the Criminal

2. Determination on the violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (Indecent Acts, etc.)

A. Whether the defendant can be acknowledged as having committed an act indicated in the facts charged

In full view of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court, namely, the contents before and after the victims’ statements are natural and detailed, the victims were to have made a statement to the school due to a contingency, and the victims cannot be deemed to have any special circumstances to make a false statement against the Defendant, the victims’ statements can be trusted in accordance with the facts charged in this part.

1) Details of the statements of victims

A) The victims stated the facts of damage, such as the statement in the school, investigative agency, and this court (attached Form). The victims’ statement on the facts of the instant offense only changed only to the pro rata part on the time and place of the occurrence of the case, but also includes a consistent and detailed situation that is difficult to easily make a statement without direct experience.

B) In particular, examining the following circumstances from the police to the prosecution after the victims stated the first injury to the school, it is difficult to deem that the victims made a false statement.

2) The details of the victims’ statement of damage

The details of the victims' statements about the damage are as follows.

① On November 4, 2016, the Defendant (title 1 omitted) was a teacher in charge of the △△△△ Group in a high school, and the victims are all students belonging to the above classes. On November 4, 2016, nine students among the students of the △△△△ Group, including the victims, were divided into conversations to the effect that the Defendant had engaged in improper physical contacts with ordinary students. On the other hand, Nonindicted 10 of the teacher in charge of the self-harm of the △△△△△△ Group in the above ○ grade.

② School made nine students enter the facts of damage on the same day. The student’s statement also states that the defendant physically and improperly contacted the dissatisfactions that the defendant had experienced during the process of strictly guiding the victims of the ordinary school, and at the bottom of the written statement, the statement states that “I consulted the students about the existence or absence of facts with respect to the written statement submitted by him/her, and I have sufficiently explained the procedures that are subsequently progress (including police stations).”

③ (Name 1 omitted) High Schools reported the Defendant to the police on the basis of the above nine students’ statement, and the Defendant’s internal intent was carried out, but the said victim Nonindicted 1, Nonindicted 2, and Nonindicted 3 did not comply with the demand of the police to appear.

④ On December 9, 2016, the Defendant sent to the parents of students on December 12, 2016 a certificate to the effect that “child was reported to the school, was excluded from the school teacher, and was excluded from the school teacher, and was excluded from the school, but did not go to the school.” At present, the Defendant sent a certificate to the police that “I will accurately confirm the case at school, and (ii) accept the position and conditions of the instant case.”

⑤ The parents of five students, including Nonindicted 1 and Nonindicted 2, were present at the school on December 16, 2016 and received a written confirmation from the Defendant regarding the following matters:

- On November 4, 2016, nine students (children or their children) of the △△△△ Group reported to the school on November 4, 2016, accept the Defendant’s “non-suspected act of sexual harassment and sexual harassment” and “not guilty” of the Defendant’s teacher’s “sexual harassment and sexual harassment.”

- All parents and students transfer their intention to “Defendant Teachers” to the “Defendant Teachers.” The nine students of the △△△△ Group request the “Defendant Teachers” formally to the “Defendant Teachers.” This is to be done not later than December 23, 2016, and the detailed conditions will be transferred back to the next.

The defendant written in the above written confirmation that "I will not raise any objection against it. I will not file a complaint with the next crime," and five students, including the victim non-indicted 1 and non-indicted 2, have affixed the name and signature on the written confirmation and issued the signature to the defendant.

④ On December 28, 2016, Nonindicted 9, who was delegated by the Defendant, sent to the parents, etc. of Nonindicted 1 and Nonindicted 2, a written statement that is not the facts of the students, as the title “request for agreement on defamation and false accusation and notification of legal measures.” This constitutes the offense of insult, defamation, and false accusation. From January 9, 2017 to January 13, 2017, Nonindicted 9, who was delegated by the Defendant, sent a certificate of content to the effect that “it is known of the position of the Defendant regarding the actions (such as death, confirmation of truth, preparation of confirmation document, payment of consolation money, etc.) to be taken against the Defendant.”

7. The nine students, including the victims, were present at the Gyeonggi Sea Center from January 6, 2016 to state the fact of damage.

8) Of the nine students, the facts charged are not specified with respect to the part of the complaints filed by the six other than the victims of the instant case, Nonindicted 2, and Nonindicted 3, or the Defendant was issued a non-suspected disposition on the ground that it was a physical contact within the scope that the Defendant could have become a teacher (Evidence 1 of the submission of counsel), and the prosecution was instituted only for the facts charged in the instant judgment.

3) Whether there was a special reason to reject the credibility of the victims’ statements

A) The defendant pointed out that the defendant often pointed out the victims because his/her learning attitude is not good, and that the victims came to reflect on the defendant and made a false statement against the defendant.

In light of the conversations between nine students, including the victims, and nine students, divided into the same anti-school students and group Kakaothy rooms, it appears that the Defendant had a considerable counter-refluence to the strict guidance of the victims. Moreover, while the victims criticize the Defendant’s guidance method in a group Kakao Stockholm room, they did not specifically mention the indecent act, such as the act indicated in the facts charged of the instant case.

However, as seen earlier, the victims did not voluntarily report the victims to the school or the investigative agency, but rather, the third teachers, including the victims, who listened to the case in the process of naturally dividing their talks. The victims prepared a written statement under the school supervision, and freely stated their complaints against the Defendant. The victims also include the Defendant’s complaint about the Defendant’s guidance method, and the contents that the Defendant led to the victim’s uncomfortable physical contact. The victims consistently stated the facts of the damage after preparing the written statement at school to the investigative agency and this court. In light of the above circumstances, it is very low possibility that the victims made a false statement. (B) The victims and their parents made a false statement to the Defendant on December 14, 2016, and signed a written confirmation stating that “the Defendant is not guilty.” The victims asserted that the Defendant again made a false statement and made a false statement with the content and the statement to the effect that the Defendant made a false statement to the victims and made a false statement to the Defendant.

The victim Nonindicted 1, Nonindicted 2’s mother Nonindicted 6, and Nonindicted 7, the victim Nonindicted 2’s mother Nonindicted 6, and Nonindicted 7 stated in this court that they submitted a written confirmation by considering that they would be able to smoothly end up the case due to fear of the victims’ occurrence (an investigative agency or a court’s appearance and statement). The victim Nonindicted 1 stated in the investigative agency that “I will do so if I want to do so, I would like to do so.” While I would like to do so, I would like to accept and see that I would like to do so, I would like to say that I would like to do so.” However, I would like to say that I would like to say that “I will do so if I will do so, I would like to do so. I would like to do so.”

Considering the fact that the victims were students in the middle school year and were going to graduate and enter the university at the time of the above time, the aforementioned witness Nonindicted 6 and Nonindicted 7’s statement that the victims attempted to reach an agreement with the Defendant solely by concerns over psychological anxietys, disadvantages, etc. in the course of criminal proceedings, are fully acceptable. According to the above statement, it is insufficient to reject the credibility of the victims’ statement made on December 12, 2016 solely on the ground that the victims and their parents prepared a written confirmation to the effect of innocence.

C) The Defendant asserted that it is difficult to recognize the credibility of the statement since the victims appeared at the police station after obtaining the certification of content on December 28, 2016, and actively stated the fact of damage. However, the victims and their parents responded to an investigation despite being notified by the Defendant that they may be held liable for defamation and false accusation, and it is difficult to readily dismiss the credibility of the statement in that the victims and their parents were aware of the burden of perjury and stated in the court.

B. Whether the defendant's act constitutes an indecent act

1) Relevant legal principles

An indecent act refers to an act that causes a general and average person in the same place as the victim objectively to feel a sense of sexual humiliation or aversion and violates good sexual morality, and thus infringes on the victim’s sexual freedom. Whether an act constitutes an indecent act ought to be determined by comprehensively taking into account the victim’s intent, gender, age, relationship between the offender and the victim, circumstances leading to the act, specific form of the act committed against the victim, the surrounding objective situation, and the sexual moral sense of that time (see Supreme Court Decision 2001Do2417, Apr. 26, 2002, etc.).

2) Specific determination

At each time when the victims make a statement, the Defendant asserted that there was a circumstance to admonish the victims on the grounds of the victim’s act of deviation, etc., and that the Defendant’s act constitutes an educational act intended to mislead or arouse the victims during that process. The Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse has a provision punishing indecent acts against children and juveniles, and punishing them separately by deceptive means and force. Considering the legislative purport of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse and the social need to protect sound values of children and juveniles’ sexual self-determination and sexual character, it is reasonable to view that even if a speech or behavior was formally implied as an indication at the education site in the past, it constitutes an “act of indecent act” under the Criminal Act if the victim’s act could cause a sense of shame or aversion from the perspective of children and juveniles, which is the victim.

In light of the above facts and circumstances acknowledged based on the above evidence, each act recorded in the facts charged in the instant case constitutes an indecent act beyond the permissible scope against the teacher, and the intent of indecent act can also be acknowledged in light of the Defendant’s behavior mode and strength.

A) The victims are 10 female students who were towing in physical contact and the Defendant is 39 years old, so the victims are forced to accept the body contact of the Defendant. However, it is difficult to see that the Defendant used two arms to use them, or made the Defendant directly contact the victims’ view (Article 1.2(a) and (c) of the Public Prosecution Act). From a general and average perspective, it is difficult to see that the above act was permissible by means of formation of trust relationship or encouragement between male teachers and female students.

B) In the case of the act described in 1. A. 1-3) of the facts charged against the victim Nonindicted Party 1, each act was committed by the Defendant in the process of pointed out and admonishing the victim’s learning attitude, etc. even according to the victim’s statement, and it appears that the Defendant had the intent to attract or consol the victim.

However, in the process of physical contact, the Defendant told, “I do not have the right to love on behalf of the male-gu head?” or “I do not see why I do it? I do not leave the victim’s body?” In the process of physical contact, I would like to say, “I do not have the right to love the victim’s body? I would like to write I would like to write I would like to write I would like to write I would like to write I would like to write I would like to write I would like to write I would like to write I would like to know I would like to say I would like to say I would like to say, “I would not have the right to sexual intercourse on the part of the defendant. I would like to say I would like to accept the victim’s physical contact with I would like to say I would like to be difficult. I would like to say that I would like to accept the victim’s physical contact with the victim, and that I would like to see that I would like to see the victim’s physical contact. I would like to accept the victim’s physical contact.”

C) The Defendant asserts that the Defendant did not have a special physical contact with the victims, but frequently made physical contacts with other students for the purpose of education and encouragement, and that only the victims with strong resistance to the Defendant were properly accepted on the basis of subjective emotions, and that the other students and teachers did not deal with this issue, the Defendant’s act is within the scope of an educator’s act.

As seen earlier, the victims had a reasonable sense of criticism against the Defendant, and due to such reflects, there seems to have been given special displeasure to the Defendant’s ordinary physical contacts. However, even if the Defendant did not form a sufficient consensus on the need for guidance accompanied by emotional ties with the victims and physical contacts, if the Defendant did not have expressed an interest or gave a guidance, it is difficult to recognize the appropriateness of the method even if the Defendant had educational purpose.

Furthermore, as seen earlier, the instant case does not begin with the students who had an anti-competence against the Defendant, but rather with nine students, including the victims, were to have a third-party teacher talked about this issue. Although a non-prosecution disposition was rendered, it is difficult to see that the whole of the students collected the Defendant based on a subjective appraisal, and it is difficult to view that the fact that other students did not take part in the Defendant’s ordinary conduct as a reason to justify the Defendant’s conduct against the victims.

3. Determination on the violation of the Personal Information Protection Act

A. The Defendant first demanded parents to compromise the content of the agreement with the Defendant in writing, and the Defendant used personal information to send proof of content to parents, but did not use it for unlawful purpose or divulge it to a third party, and the need to recover the character and honor infringed on the students’ interest was more higher than that infringed on the students’ interest. Therefore, the Defendant asserts that the Defendant’s act of using the student’s address constitutes a justifiable act.

B. In light of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court: (a) the content certification that the Defendant sent by the Defendant is a document stating the Defendant’s subjective position to communicate the facts and notify the necessity of attendance, rather than the objective content of informing the Defendant of the necessity of attendance; (b) the Defendant continued to work at a school despite the fact that the Defendant was excluded from the attendance; (c) it is not difficult to communicate with the students or their parents through the school; and (c) the Defendant could have been urged to proceed with disciplinary or investigation procedures or investigation by a school or an investigative agency; or (d) it appears that the Defendant could have been able to dispute the legitimacy of the disposition itself excluded from his duties without confirming the facts; and (e) it is difficult to view that the Defendant’s use of personal information to send the content certification as stated in the criminal facts paragraph (2) of the judgment falls under a justifiable act since it does not meet the requirements of legitimacy, urgency, or supplementary nature of the purpose. Therefore, the Defendant and the defense counsel’s aforementioned assertion cannot be accepted.

1. Scope of applicable sentences under law: Fines of 10 million won to 45 million won;

2. Application of the sentencing criteria: The sentencing criteria shall not apply as the person selects a fine.

3. Determination of sentence;

Although the Defendant, as a teacher, led the victims to form a sound sense of values and to protect their sexual self-determination, the Defendant used the personal information of the victims for an indecent act by force and for private purposes by taking advantage of his status. In the absence of sufficient emotional assistant and consensus with the victims, the Defendant thought that his act would have been permitted as a practice in the context of failing to form a sufficient emotional assistant and consensus with the victims, and appears to have taken place in the instant crime.

However, the extent of the accused's indecent act is not severe, and the accused seems to have been educational purposes. The accused has faithfully performed his school life and has no criminal record.

The punishment as ordered shall be determined in consideration of various sentencing conditions shown in the records and arguments, such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, motive and background of the crime, means and results thereof, and circumstances after the crime.

[Attachment]

Judges Lee Sung-won (Presiding Judge)