1. The fundamental seriousness of deepfake sex crimes and an ever-tighter net of punishment
With recent advances in artificial intelligence (AI) technology, deepfake sex crimes, in which a specific person's face is synthesized into pornographic material, have emerged as a serious social problem. Those who commit these crimes often begin out of curiosity or an indulgence in visual fantasy. On the other hand, the sexual humiliation and distress a victim experiences when an ordinary photo from their daily life is turned into a fabricated video is every bit as serious as that suffered in a sexual assault involving physical contact, and it can leave permanent scars. 

In step with the gravity of these crimes, Article 14-2 of the current Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment of Sexual Crimes provides that anyone who edits, synthesizes, or distributes video against the will of the person depicted shall be punished by imprisonment of up to seven years or a fine of up to KRW 50 million. In particular, through Paragraph 4 of the same Article, newly established in October 2024, a tight net of punishment has been built that cuts off demand at the source: even those who did not directly produce or distribute the video but merely possessed, purchased, stored, or viewed it can be sentenced to up to three years in prison.

2. The Supreme Court's new practical standard on deepfakes targeting children and adolescents 
Amid the trend toward stronger punishment, the Supreme Court recently issued a ruling of major practical importance on whether deepfake videos constitute 'child or juvenile sexual exploitation material' under the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles Against Sexual Offenses (Supreme Court Decision 2024Do17801, decided August 14, 2025). The Supreme Court held that a so-called deepfake video, in which the face of a real child or juvenile is synthesized onto a nude photograph of an unidentified person, is merely an image created by its maker and cannot be regarded as depicting a real person engaging in a sexual act, and therefore does not in principle constitute 'sexual exploitation material in which a child or juvenile appears' under Article 2, Subparagraph 5 of that Act. 

In other words, the Court made clear that Article 14-2 of the Sexual Crimes Punishment Act, rather than the Juvenile Sex Protection Act (Child and Juvenile Act), which carries the extremely heavy penalty of life imprisonment or a fixed term of five years or more, is primarily applicable. However, the Supreme Court also closed off any blind spot in punishment by making clear that, when the appearance, developmental stage, and actual age of the person depicted in the synthesized image, along with the circumstances of its production, are considered as a whole, the Juvenile Sex Protection Act can still be strictly applied if the resulting material qualifies as 'an expression that can be clearly recognized as depicting a child or juvenile.'

3. The importance of rigorous legal analysis in an increasingly harsh judicial environment 
The stance taken in this latest Supreme Court precedent suggests that while the courts maintain a firm resolve to crack down on deepfake sex crimes, they are also drawing very fine distinctions as to the applicable provisions and the gravity of each case, in accordance with the principle of strict construction of penal statutes. 

As the elements of these offenses become more finely subdivided and the judicial environment grows this complex, emotional appeals or vague responses are bound to fall short. Therefore, anyone implicated in such a case must, from the earliest stage of the investigation, obtain an objective and accurate legal analysis of which provision the video in question falls under, and of the specific nature of the conduct and the criminal intent involved. (Attorney Shin Dong-woo, DAEON Law Firm)

Source: Mediafine News (https://www.mediafine.co.kr)