|
[1] The meaning of ""obscenity"" as defined in Article 48-2 of the old Framework Act on Telecommunications and the criteria of finding obscenity
[2] The purport of providing ""mistake of law"" in Article 16 of the Criminal Code
[3] Whether a crime of aiding and abetting under the Criminal Code can be committed through nonfeasance (affirmative)
[4] The requirements for being recognized as nonfeasor under the Criminal Code
[5] The case affirming that a crime of aiding and abetting violating Article 48-2 of the former Framework Act on Telecommunications was committed since there is a duty on the part of defendants to require providers of contents to delete obscene animations under the principle of sound reasoning where the defendants opened an adult animation chamber for profits and managed an adult channel as a leader of entertainment channel team on the Internet portal site and as employees in charge of operating an animation business using the above entertainment channel
|
