Whether the Victim Expressed Refusal at the Time of Filming and Whether the Suspect Acted Intentionally (With Awareness)

The client met a woman through a dating application, and the two developed a mutual attraction and began seeing each other. During their first sexual encounter, the client recorded the sexual activity using their mobile phone. However, no recording was made during their second encounter.

As their relationship subsequently grew distant, the woman filed a criminal complaint against the client, alleging that the recording had been made without her consent during their first encounter.

The client maintained that the woman had been fully aware of the recording at the time and had not objected, leading the client to believe that she had consented.

However, after being formally booked and placed under investigation on sexual offense charges, the client sought legal assistance from Chon Hyeong hwan, Managing Attorney at MegaX Law Office, feeling both unjustly accused and fearful of the potential consequences.

01 Whether the Recording Was Made Against the Other Party’s Will

02 Whether There Was Criminal Intent

MegaX Law Office defended the client from the investigation stage through meticulous evidence analysis and the development of legal arguments.

1. Digital Forensics and Video Analysis

An examination of the recovered video footage confirmed that the complainant was aware of the position of the recording device (mobile phone). The footage contained no scenes suggesting that the recording was made against the complainant’s will, such as attempts to stop the recording or expressions of refusal.

2. Using the Complainant’s Statements to Support the Defense

MegaX focused on the fact that the complainant had provided highly detailed statements during the investigation regarding the circumstances and physical positions at the time of the incident.

This became a strong basis for arguing that the complainant had been fully aware of the situation and capable of making informed judgments at the time.

3. Lack of Awareness (Absence of Criminal Intent)

MegaX emphasized that there were circumstances reasonably supporting the client’s belief that the complainant had responded when asked for consent before the recording.

Furthermore, MegaX argued that if the complainant did not attempt to stop the recording, even in a passive manner, there was a substantial possibility that the client could have mistakenly interpreted the situation as indicating explicit or implied consent.

On this basis, MegaX actively argued that the client lacked the criminal intent required to establish the alleged offense.