Constitutional Court upholds penalties for virtual child sex abuse material

The Constitutional Court ruled on June 24 that provisions punishing the profit-driven distribution and possession of virtual child and adolescent sex abuse materials do not violate the Constitution. The justices reached a unanimous decision to reject a lower court's request for a constitutional review.

The ruling addresses sections of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles Against Sexual Offenses covering digital images where subjects are recognizable as children. Distributing such material for profit carries a prison term of at least five years, while knowingly possessing it is punishable by at least one year.

In its reasoning, the court emphasized that continuous exposure to such virtual materials can distort sexual perceptions and values, potentially leading to actual sexual crimes against minors. The justices noted that even though no real child is victimized during production, the content promotes the sexual objectification of minors and poses a significant threat to their healthy development.

The decision weighed the rapid advancement of artificial intelligence technology, which has made generating virtual abuse material increasingly easy with simple commands. The court pointed out that deepfake videos utilizing the faces of real children constitute a permanent record of sexual abuse, causing enduring psychological harm to victims whose images are misused.

The court rejected arguments that cartoons or animations should be treated differently due to their fictional nature, reasoning that such media can exaggerate physical features and stimulate the imagination in ways that may lower barriers to violence. Consequently, the danger posed by animated content cannot be clearly distinguished from that of realistic video imagery.

The case originated from a defendant who uploaded 82 comic files depicting sexual acts involving characters recognizable as minors to an online site for profit between July 16 and August 21, 2020. The presiding trial court requested the constitutional review on February 25, 2022.

The Constitutional Court concluded that the legislature had reasonable grounds for imposing strict penalties to prevent the spread of such materials. It stated that current sentencing guidelines allow judges sufficient discretion to consider mitigating circumstances.