Possession of Sexual Exploitation Material | ‘Non-Prosecution’ on Charges of Possessing Sexual Exploitation Material While Using a Chat App

Possession of sexual exploitation material is classified as a very serious sexual offense that is subject to punishment by mere possession alone, and criminal liability is not exempted even where the material has actually been deleted.

Under Article 11, Paragraph 5 of the Act on the Protection of Children and Youth against Sexual Abuse, a person who possesses or views such material while knowing that it is sexual exploitation material may be subject to the severe penalty of imprisonment for a definite term of at least one year.

Accordingly, even if a person explains that the conduct was no more than a mistake or curiosity, this is not accepted in the legal assessment of a case involving possession of sexual exploitation material, and it is a matter that requires, from the initial stage, an accurate organization of the facts, proof of mitigating circumstances, and a legal rebuttal regarding the determination of intent.

A case of possession of sexual exploitation material does not end with the downloading of a video, and the investigative authorities make a comprehensive assessment of factors such as the attitude shown in the initial statement, the level of the suspect's awareness, and whether the conduct was repeated.

Because whether criminal punishment is imposed can vary greatly depending on the timing and strategy of the response, it is essential to construct the logic of the response with the assistance of a criminal law attorney.

The attorney specializing in sexual offenses organized the circumstances that inevitably made the other party appear to be an adult, including the registration process of the chat application, the possibility of age manipulation, and the seller's sales methods.

In particular, the attorney emphasized that the platform itself was structured to require adult verification.

The attorney organized the facts so that they could affect the sentencing for the charge of possession of sexual exploitation material, pointing out that the client had purchased only a portion of the videos two or three times within a short period and had never continuously shared or distributed them.

The attorney prepared a detailed account and submitted it to the investigative authorities, setting out that the client had sincerely apologized to the victim and had personally written letters of reflection on several occasions, that the victim's side had expressed an intention to settle, and that the client had lived diligently despite economic hardship while supporting a sibling with a severe disability.