The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The court below erred in the misapprehension of legal principles in finding the defendant guilty, although the motion picture taken by the misunderstanding of legal principles cannot be deemed to have taken pictures of a woman's body part that may cause sexual humiliation or shame, in light of the body condition and method of shooting.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (the amount of 3,00,000 won, the amount of 40 hours completed a sexual assault treatment program, confiscation) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of misapprehension of the legal doctrine, Article 14(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes, which punishs the act of photographing another person’s body, which may cause sexual humiliation or shame against the latter’s will, using a camera or other devices with similar functions, is to protect the victim of personality chain’s freedom of sexual freedom and without permission.

Therefore, whether the photographing body of another person, which may cause sexual humiliation or sense of shame, constitutes “the body of another person,” should be objectively determined by taking into account the following circumstances, which are duly adopted and examined by the court below, in light of the following circumstances, i.e., the victim’s clothes, the degree of exposure, etc., as well as the background leading up to the photographer’s intent, the place of filming, the degree of exposure, etc., the photographer’s photograph, the photographer’s photograph, the image of the photographer’s photograph, and the importance of specific body parts (see Supreme Court Decision 2008Do707, Sept. 25, 2008, etc.).