The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

Provided, That the above punishment shall be imposed for one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. According to the summary of the grounds for appeal (not guilty part) of the evidence of this case, it is sufficient to recognize the facts charged in violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (hereinafter “Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc.”)

(On the other hand, the prosecutor does not expressly state the grounds for appeal against the guilty part of the judgment of the court below, but appeals against the whole judgment including the guilty part). 2.

A. The summary of the facts charged [the fact of violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Amerasation and photographing of Camerass, etc.)] taken on July 20, 2012 from the cell phone located in Gwangju Mine-gu C at around 06:00 to the cell phone installed in the 412 room of the D building located in Gwangju Mine-gu, and taken the body of the victim who could cause a sense of sexual humiliation against the victim’s will.

B. The victim of the judgment of the court below stated from the investigative agency to the court below that "the cell phone of the defendant is set up in a way that it can be seen that the cell phone of the defendant has been set up in a Schlage, and the screen is checked, and the cancelled screen is stored, three screen pictures were set up on the island, but the defendant prevented him from reproducing the screen, and thereafter, the defendant called "the video to be mixed" was recorded. However, in light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the witness F's statement in the court below and the written appraisal of cell phone evidence, the video stored in the defendant's cell phone is limited to one film file and five minutes or less, and the victim stated only that the police officer dispatched after receiving a report on 112 on the day of the case, made a statement only on the facts that the defendant used to use the cell phone." However, it is reasonable to view that the victim took up the cell phone of the defendant.