The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

Provided, That the above punishment shall be imposed for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts (the point of violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Use and photographing of Cameras, etc.)) was connected to the F account of the victim, and the victim talked with G, and the victim sent a photograph of the video that the victim flicked with clothes in studio-carf, and it did not constitute a transmission of the victim’s bio-friendly photo.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one year of imprisonment and 40 hours of order to complete sexual assault treatment programs) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. (1) The summary of this part of the facts charged is that the Defendant, at around April 2017 to May 5, 2017, sent one copy of the victim’s back-to-door D Building in Ansan-si and its own house in Ansan-si, and one copy of the victim’s back-to-date photo that the Defendant was in custody by entering the victim’s ID and password into the victim’s F account and connected to the victim’s F Account by accessing the victim’s back-to-date G with the victim’s sexual intercourse.

Accordingly, the defendant provided the body of the victim who could cause sexual humiliation or shame by using a mechanical device with a camera function.

(2) The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in full view of the evidence as indicated in its judgment.

(3) In full view of the following circumstances that can be recognized by the records of the party deliberation, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to recognize that the defendant sent the victim’s upper half-hand photographs to G.

(A) As a result of search and seizure of the victim’s cell phone and computer contained in the victim’s photograph sent by the Defendant, the photograph recorded in the facts charged was not found.