However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Around 04:40 on May 24, 2016, the Defendant, at the lower parking lot of “E” coffee shop located in Suwon-si, the Defendant: (a) viewed and took down an unspecified female seat in the coffee shop; and (b) took down her sexual organ and took a scambling act.

2. At around 05:00 on July 9, 2016, the Defendant: (a) seeed and took down, at the top of the “E” coffee shop, all unspecified women who were seated in the coffee shop; and (b) flaged their sexual organ and flaged their sexual organ.

3. On August 18, 2016, the Defendant: (a) 04:45 on August 18, 2016, at the top of the above “E” coffee shop, she took a look at and down an unspecified female who was seated in the coffee shop; and (b) took a part in the act of self-defense, taking a flag of sexual organ.

Accordingly, the Defendant made a patently obscene act three times.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A statement prepared by the F;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes governing the 112 Reporting Case Handling List;

1. Relevant Article 245 of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the facts of crime, and the choice of imprisonment, respectively;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 16(2) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes committed a public performance and obscenity act three times. In light of the content, method, frequency, etc. of the crime, the crime is deemed inferior.

However, the sentence is ordered as ordered, considering the fact that the defendant has recognized a mistake, is against the defendant, and the defendant does not repeat the crime in the future, such as receiving a mental therapy, and the fact that the defendant has no record of punishment for the same kind of crime prior to the instant case, and comprehensively takes into account the defendant's age, character and conduct, and all other conditions of sentencing as shown in the records and arguments.