1. The Client's Crisis

The client was a high school student who had been in a close relationship with a person they had known since middle school. During the course of their relationship, they became intimate out of curiosity, and the encounter was recorded on a mobile phone.

The problem began when rumors about this relationship started spreading around the community. A third party first circulated the information, and the rumor eventually spread to students from other schools as well. In the end, the police launched an investigation, and the client was accused of violating the Act on the Protection of Children and Youth Against Sexual Abuse. The allegations were producing sexual exploitation material and distributing sexual exploitation material.

If these charges were upheld against a minor, the consequences could have been irreversible, affecting not only juvenile protection dispositions but also future employment restrictions and the registration of personal information well into adulthood. The client's parents came urgently to Law Firm Jonjae.

2. Key Issues

There were two main issues to contest in this case.

First, with respect to the allegation of producing sexual exploitation material, the key question was whether the filming had been carried out with the other party's consent. The Act on the Protection of Children and Youth Against Sexual Abuse punishes the production of sexual exploitation material involving minors, but the legal judgment could change depending on whether there was mutual consent and on the circumstances of the filming. It was necessary to examine in detail whether the recorded material actually existed and whether its content legally constituted "sexual exploitation material."

Second, regarding the allegation of distributing sexual exploitation material, it had to be determined whether the client had actually sent or disseminated the footage to a third party. It was true that rumors spread, but the spread of rumors and the actual distribution of a video are separate matters. Since the client had mentioned the existence of the video to friends, the issue was whether that could be considered "distribution."

3. Strategy

Attorney Jung Won-joon, Attorney Shin Mi-jin, and Attorney Moon Jeong-woong developed a defense strategy centered on digital evidence analysis and securing witness statements.

For the allegation of producing sexual exploitation material, we proved through the statements of the relevant parties that the filming took place by mutual consent between the parties during their relationship. At the same time, we examined whether any footage legally qualifying as sexual exploitation material actually existed on the mobile phones of the client and the other party. As confirmed during the investigation, no specific material existed that could substantiate the charge.

For the allegation of distributing sexual exploitation material, we closely analyzed the digital forensics results from the client's mobile phone. After reviewing the clients' friends' phones and SNS message transmission records, no evidence was found that any nude images or sexual intercourse videos of the other party had been sent. The forensic data also contained no log records showing that a video file had been attached and transmitted. The witness statements were also consistent in saying, "I never directly saw the video," and their accounts matched one another.

It was true that the client had mentioned the existence of the video to friends, but we supported through witness statements that this was merely a casual remark rather than an attempt to boast. We presented the investigative authorities with the legal principle that such a mention and the legal act of "distribution" must be strictly distinguished.

4. Outcome and Recovery

The police decided not to refer the case to prosecution, citing "insufficient evidence" for the allegation of producing sexual exploitation material and "no charges" for the allegation of distributing sexual exploitation material. All allegations against the client were not referred, and the investigation was closed.

In cases involving sexual protection laws where a minor is involved, the initial response at the investigation stage determines the outcome. If the allegations are upheld, long-term disadvantages can follow not only in the form of juvenile protection dispositions but also into adulthood. Through digital forensic analysis and the securing of witness statements, Law Firm Jonjae systematically submitted materials that enabled the investigative authorities to objectively assess the allegations and protected the client's future.

If you are wondering how to respond in a similar situation, we recommend consulting a professional, as the outcome may differ depending on the specific facts of the case.

Responsible Attorneys: Attorney Jung Won-joon · Attorney Shin Mi-jin · Attorney Moon Jeong-woong

To protect confidentiality, this case has been partially de-identified to the extent that it does not undermine the essence of the matter.