The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that: (a) the Defendant recognized all of the instant crimes and is in profoundly against the Defendant; (b) F, the victim of the crime of aggressioning a structure, does not want the Defendant’s punishment; (c) has no criminal power against the Defendant; (d) the mother and her mother, who are his family members, maintained a ties relationship with his family members; (c) the Defendant has committed a dynamic repeated crime with sexual desire and defense heart; and (d) the Defendant has committed a criminal act with prison labor for more than six months; and (e) the Defendant has committed a prison life with prison labor for more than six months; and (e) the punishment imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. In light of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant took a photograph of approximately 300 victims’ sexual intercourses or clothes from cell phones over a period exceeding 10 months, and posted some of them on the Internet cameras at least seven occasions; (b) even though the Defendant took measures to prevent the same damage as the instant crime, such as the period and frequency of the crime, and the establishment of a wire network, the Defendant cannot be seen as mere dynamic crime in light of continuing the crime; (c) the victims’ potential damage caused by pictures and videos, potential damage caused by Internet posts such as video, possibility of spread of damage caused by such images, etc.; and (d) the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, motive, means and consequence of the crime; and (e) the circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence imposed by the lower court cannot be deemed to be unreasonable.

The defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.

3. Accordingly, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal by the defendant is groundless. It is so decided as per Disposition