Gangneung Sex Crimes Attorney | Gangneung Attorney Obtains a Suspended Sentence for a Client Who Purchased and Viewed Sexual Exploitation Material

The client saw a promotional banner for an illegal Telegram room and entered it out of curiosity.

However, that Telegram room was a chat room that sold and shared illegal sexual exploitation material of children and youth.

Because the client had entered out of curiosity at first, the client only paid the participation fee and merely looked around without any intention of purchasing videos.

In the meantime, the client received a notice from the room operator that, in order to continue participating in the room, one had to purchase at least one video.

In the end, the client had no intention of purchasing but purchased two videos because of the room operator's pressure to buy.

The two videos the client downloaded were videos featuring children and youth and were videos that constituted illegal sexual exploitation material.

Even while downloading and viewing the videos, the client did not recognize that the videos were sexual exploitation videos of children and youth, and after purchasing them, the client viewed each once and then deleted them out of lack of interest.

However, when that illegal Telegram room came under police investigation, the client belatedly learned of the fact that the client had purchased and possessed sexual exploitation material of children and youth.

The client was ultimately booked on charges of purchasing and viewing sexual exploitation material and came under police investigation.

The client explained to the attorney that the client had not initially known that the material was sexual exploitation material of children and youth, and that, because the frequency of downloading and viewing was low, the sentence sought by the prosecution felt far too heavy, and so requested assistance.

The attorney first confirmed the punishment law applicable to the client and then prepared evidence and pleadings tailored to the client's situation.

The attorney explained that the law punishing sexual exploitation material was as follows.

Sexual exploitation material of children and youth refers to material in the form of a video or the like that depicts content in which a child or youth, or a person or representation that can clearly be perceived as a child or youth, appears and engages in sexual acts such as sexual intercourse or masturbation.

The client asked the attorney which law applies to this case.

The attorney conveyed that, because the client had purchased and viewed sexual exploitation material, an actual custodial sentence would be difficult to avoid.

According to Supreme Court precedent, even if obscene material and the like was downloaded and then deleted, the offense of possession is established because the act is completed at the moment of downloading. (Supreme Court, Judgment of September 3, 1999, 99Do2317)

In addition, if a person views in real time a photograph or video of sexual exploitation material of children and youth posted on a website, merely viewing it does not constitute an act of possession. However, if, depending on the manner of posting, the photograph or video is stored on the computer while being displayed, this falls under an act of possession and may be punishable.

However, there are cases in which a person was not punished because, having downloaded material without knowing it was sexual exploitation material of children and youth, the person deleted it immediately after confirming its nature, which was found to show no intent to possess.

The attorney explained that the client had entered the room out of simple curiosity and then had no choice but to make a purchase because of the room operator's continued notices and urging to buy.

However, the attorney emphasized that the client did not even view the videos immediately after purchase, and that even when the client did view them, the client watched each once and deleted them immediately out of lack of interest.

In this way, the attorney strongly asserted that the client's conduct was not habitual and was an impulsive act of purchasing and viewing.

When the client entered the Telegram room, the client had no idea whether sexual exploitation material of children and youth or illegal filming material was posted there.

This is because, after entering the chat room, the client downloaded two video files and viewed them briefly, but it is considered difficult to recognize that the videos were ones featuring children and youth.

The attorney argued that, when the client was later booked by the police, the client realized that the downloaded videos were illegal sexual exploitation videos and was showing deep remorse and regret.

The attorney stated that the client was still a third-year university student, had no prior record for the same type of offense, and that the criminal conduct in this case was the client's first.

The attorney emphasized that, because this was the client's first offense, the client was deeply repenting and showing remorse for having engaged in criminal conduct.