The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the factual error and the misapprehension of legal principle) is reasonable to deem that each act of the defendant, as stated in the facts charged in this case, constitutes emotional abuse that harms the mental health and development of victimized children, but the court below acquitted the defendant of the facts charged in this case, which erred by misapprehending the legal principles and thereby adversely affecting

2. Determination

A. Article 17 Subparag. 5 of the Child Welfare Act provides that “Chosome abuse that may cause harm to the mental health and development of a child” refers to emotional abuse or emotional abuse that does not accompany the exercise of tangible force, but does not reach physical damage. This includes not only where mental health and the normal development of a child actually impedes the mental health and the normal development of the child, but also where the risk or risk of causing such a result arises (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Do1348, Dec. 23, 2015). Meanwhile, the legislative purpose and basic ideology of the Child Welfare Act; the characteristics of emotional abuse that may have an fatal influence on the child’s development; the type of abuse; the legislative structure and academic precedents of the Child Welfare Act, which provide that physical and emotional abuse and the types of abuse shall be punished by statutory punishment; however, when comprehensively discussing the legislative structure, related precedents and academic circles, etc. of the Child Welfare Act, the act of causing harm to the child’s body or emotional abuse of the child, thereby maintaining the mental and emotional development of the child.

Constitutional Court en banc Order 2014Hun-Ba266 Decided October 21, 2015 (see Constitutional Court en banc Order 2014Hun-Ba266).