The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Although the summary of the grounds for appeal revealed that the Defendant was exposed to his body while sitting on the road, this does not constitute “obscenity act” as referred to in the crime of obscenity by merely exposing sexual organ while protesting against the police officer’s measure.

Nevertheless, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles which found guilty of the facts charged of this case, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant also asserted the same purport as the grounds for appeal in the lower court, and the lower court rejected the instant argument on the ground that the Defendant was seated in a place where people’s traffic was frequent without having any clothes and completely exposed to his sexual organ, and that some students could not be seen as an act contrary to the concept of sexual morality to the extent that it would prejudice ordinary people’s normal sense of sexual shame, and found the Defendant guilty of the instant charges.

B. In light of the records of this case, a thorough examination of the above judgment of the court below is justified, and the defendant's assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition, since the defendant's appeal is without merit.