South Korea Supreme Court rules that a man in his 40s who demanded a marriage vow and a kissing photo from a 10-year-old girl is guilty of sexual exploitation

The Supreme Court has ruled that a man in his 40s who sent sexually offensive messages to a 10-year-old girl, demanding marriage vows and photos of kissing, is guilty of sexually exploitative communication.
This is the first case in which the new punishment clause established after the "Nth Room Incident" has been confirmed by the Supreme Court. On the morning of the 13th, the Supreme Court ruled that Defendant A (40), who is accused of two crimes, child abuse and sexual exploitation,
The Supreme Court also upheld the ruling, finding the defendant guilty of both charges and giving him a two-year prison sentence with three years of probation.
Defendant A is accused of sending 45 messages in January 2022 to the victim, whom he met on the metaverse platform, inducing sexual desire or disgust.
In addition to the charges of child abuse under the Child Welfare Act, the charge of sexual exploitative communication under the Child and Adolescent Sexual Protection Act was also applied.
This offence is committed when someone continues or repeatedly engages in dialogue that induces sexual desire or aversion for the purpose of engaging in sexual activity, or when someone induces or solicits someone to engage in sexual activity.
Defendant A sent messages to the victim several times, such as "You are my property" and "I get excited when you use honorific language." He also sent photos of them kissing.
He also demanded that the victim's mother handwrite a marriage vow without his knowledge and send it to him, and that he record himself saying "I love you."
The first trial found him guilty only of child abuse. He was found not guilty of sexual exploitative conversation and sentenced to one year and six months in prison, suspended for three years.
However, the second trial handed down a different verdict. The Seoul Central District Court found him guilty of both charges. As a result, the sentence was slightly heavier, with a two-year prison sentence suspended for three years.
The second trial court stated, "Defendant A knew that the victim was 10 years old," and "the victim was a young child with immature awareness, judgment, and ability to deal with sexual matters."
Despite knowing this, I sent her multiple messages containing romantic expressions such as kissing and marriage, as well as expressions that could be interpreted as sexual."
During the trial, Defendant A claimed that he had sent the messages with pure romantic feelings, but the second trial court did not accept this.
The second trial court ruled that "the fact that defendant A, who was 38 years old at the time, expressed romantic feelings for the 10-year-old victim in itself carries sexual connotations and is likely to induce sexual aversion.
Defendant A appealed to the Supreme Court against the second-instance ruling, stating, "The victim has almost no awareness of sex, so even if she hears related expressions, she does not feel sexual aversion or anything like that.
" However, the Supreme Court did not accept Defendant A's argument. Today, the Supreme Court confirmed the ruling, stating that "the original (second instance) court did not misunderstand legal principles."