logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2019.06.13 2019고단1005
정보통신망이용촉진및정보보호등에관한법률위반(음란물유포)
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

No person shall distribute, sell, rent, or openly exhibit any obscene codes, language, sound, image, or motion picture to the public.

Nevertheless, around August 6, 2015, the Defendant posted a total of 70 obscene video files, as shown in the attached list of crimes, from August 6, 2015 to September 8, 2018, in a total of 70 obscene video files as shown in the attached list of crimes, which are connected to the Web B apartment C, and the web website D adult bulletin board, which is called “F after accessing Add (ID)”, so that many and unspecified members can download them.

Accordingly, the Defendant displayed 70 obscene videos openly.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Examination protocol of the accused by prosecution;

1. A copy of each warrant of search and seizure inspection, a copy of the protocol of seizure, and a copy;

1. Materials printed out of suspect's business Round evidence;

1. Application of the CD 1 statute

1. Articles 74(1)2 and 44-7(1)1 of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, Etc. for criminal facts constitute a single comprehensive crime inasmuch as the crime of this case is committed not only by the same legal interest, but also by posting the obscene video file continuously in the same manner with the same criminal intent for a single and continuous period under the same circumstances with a single and continuous criminal intent. The prosecutor indicted the crime of this case as concurrent crimes. However, even though the court acknowledged the criminal facts charged as concurrent crimes, it is recognized by the court as they are, and even if the criminal facts charged as concurrent crimes are punished as a single comprehensive crime with a different legal evaluation as to the number of crimes charged as concurrent crimes, it does not affect the defense of the defendant, and thus, it is recognized as a single comprehensive crime without any amendment to indictment (see Supreme Court Decision 87Do546, Jul. 21, 1987; 200).

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Articles 10(1) and 8 of the Act on the Regulation and Punishment of Criminal Proceeds Concealment.

arrow