A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

1. On September 24, 2016, the Defendant obscenity 22:20 on September 24, 2016, on the street of the E church located in D, Suwon-si, Suwon-si, set a Fro-pat car and sit in the driver’s seat, and reported that he she gets out of his gender when he was seated (20 years old).

The act of self-defense was committed.

Accordingly, the Defendant publicly committed an obscene act.

2. On September 24, 2016, the Defendant found the Victim G at the time and place described in paragraph (1), as described in paragraph (1), and, on September 24, 2016, through the entrance of the studio in which the victim, located in Suwon-gu, Suwon-si, Suwon-si, was invaded upon the victim’s residence to the 2nd floor stairs of the said studio.

Summary of Evidence

1. Legal statement of the defendant (as at the date of the first public trial, in the case);

1. Statement of the police statement related to G;

1. On-site photographs [as to paragraph 1 of the judgment, the defendant and his defense counsel held that the defendant's act of self-defense was committed within his own car, and that the window was closed without turning on inside the car, and therefore, there was no performance of the crime of obscenity in the performance. However, this court held that the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court, i.e., the inside of the car at the time of the defendant's act of self-defense within the car, and the window was closed. However, in light of the fact that the inside of the vehicle was well displayed on street, etc., while considering the fact that the vehicle was well displayed around the street, etc., and that G was witnessed by the defendant's act of self-defense at the time when he was returned to the police agency, the defendant's act of self-defense was recognizable to an unspecified or many unspecified persons

Since it is reasonable to see that there was a performance of obscenity

In light of the above circumstances, the defendant was aware of the public performance at the time.

It is reasonable to view it.

Therefore, we cannot accept the above argument of the defendant and his defense counsel.

1. Criminal facts;