The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of one million won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant (1) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles are only defending the Defendant, and the Defendant did not first assault the victim.

(2) The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

B. A prosecutor (1) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles revealing a sexual organ to C by stating that “a tea, tea, or kin with interest.”

(2) The lower court’s above sentence is too unjustifiable and unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal for ex officio determination.

In the first instance of the trial, the prosecutor kept the facts charged as to the previous public performance and applied for the amendment of indictment to the name of the offense in the first instance, "Violation of the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act" in the applicable provisions of Acts, "Article 3 (1) 33 of the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act" in addition to the facts charged, and since this court permitted it, the judgment of the court below can no longer be maintained.

However, despite the above reasons for ex officio destruction, both parties' assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles is still subject to the judgment of this court.

B. The judgment of the court below as to the defendant's assertion (the point of violence) was identical to that of the reasons for appeal in this part, and the court below rejected the defendant's assertion in detail with the defendant's assertion and its judgment. The court below's judgment is just because the records are compared with the evidence legitimately adopted and examined by the court below, and the above argument is without merit

The defendant is not guilty of supporting the victim.

C. The judgment of the prosecutor on the prosecutor's assertion (the point of public performance and obscenity) states in detail the decision on this part of the facts charged in the judgment, and somewhat ambiguously, the court below revealed the sexual organ to C who the defendant gets down from the vehicle while the defendant puts his urology.