If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

At around 15:20 on April 24, 2019, the Defendant committed a self-defense act for about 10 minutes in a way of cutting his/her bomb into one hand while the Defendant passed from the second floor of the 2nd floor and the stairs of the third floor of the 3rd floor in Changwon-si, Changwon-si.

Accordingly, the Defendant publicly committed an obscene act.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Stenographic records;

1. One copy of a photograph of a CCTV image closure;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on report of internal investigation (specific time of damage);

1. Article 245 of the Criminal Act and Article 245 of the Criminal Act concerning the crime, the choice of fines;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The main sentence of Article 16 (2) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes committed;

1. In full view of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant’s age to exempt the employment restriction order under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act; (b) type of crime; (c) criminal records; and the social benefits expected by the employment restriction order; and (c) the prevention effect of sexual crimes; and (d) the disadvantage and anticipated side effects of the Defendant, etc., the Defendant is determined as having special circumstances where the employment restriction order shall not be issued to the child or juvenile-related institution, etc. and welfare facilities for the disabled; and (d) accordingly, the Defendant is not subject to an employment restriction order under the proviso to Article 56(

The reason for sentencing is that the defendant recognizes the crime of this case and reflects it, and that it is the primary offender who has no criminal punishment power, age, character and conduct, family relation, environment, motive, means and result of the crime of this case, etc., the punishment as ordered shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account various factors of sentencing that are shown in the trial process of this case, such as