The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

The summary of the grounds for appeal (based on factual errors, misunderstanding of legal principles) is erroneous in misapprehending the legal principles on “child pornography” or by misapprehending the legal principles on “child and juvenile pornography,” since the video displayed by the Defendant (hereinafter “instant video”) did not appear as a child or juvenile pornography, and thus, constitutes “child and juvenile pornography.”

A summary of the facts charged in the primary charge of this case shall not be openly displayed or shown with obscene materials used by children or juveniles.

Nevertheless, from March 8, 2013 to April 18, 2013, the Defendant, at the Defendant’s house located in Asan City C Apartment 111-108, connected to the Internet file sharing site (D) and offered that the Defendant is able to have many and unspecified members get off by having access to the Defendant’s house, which is called “satisfying pregnancy in the adult bulletin board.”

Accordingly, the Defendant openly displayed child or juvenile pornography.

The key issue of the instant case is whether the worship appearing in the video of the instant case is a “person who can be perceived as a child or juvenile”.

The principle of no crime and punishment, which are guaranteed through Article 12 and Article 13 of the Constitution, mean that crimes and punishment must be determined by law. The principle of clarity derived from such principle of no crime without the law, can be predicted by anyone who intends to punish the act and what punishment is, and the elements of a crime can be clearly defined so that anyone can make a decision on his act.