(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.1.26. 선고 2017노2109 판결

The Defendant did not engage in self-defense as stated in the facts charged in the instant case. However, it was merely a flicker’s disease to return, and there was no criminal intent to commit a obscenity act.

B. Unreasonable sentencing

The sentence of the court below is too heavy.

2. Determination

A. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts

The term “obscenity act” under Article 245 of the Criminal Act refers to an act contrary to the concept of sexual morality by stimulating ordinary people’s sexual desire and impairing normal sexual humiliation by stimulating them, and such an act does not necessarily require the expression of a sexual act or expression of sexual intent (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Do1264, Jan. 13, 2006).

According to the evidence examined by the court below and the trial court, the defendant, as shown in the facts charged in this case, has taken knee under knee and took knee on the road, and had taken knee on the road, and had taken knee action which seems to have been obviously seen as a self-defense act on the witness C.

In addition, in light of the above facts, the Defendant’s act, regardless of the Defendant’s intention or internal deliberation, constitutes an obscene act as provided for in the crime of obscenity, and the Defendant’s act, regardless of the Defendant’s intent or internal deliberation, is presumed to constitute an obscene act as provided for in the crime of obscenity, and the Defendant’s act, regardless of the Defendant’s intent or internal deliberation, constitutes an obscene act as provided for in the crime of obscenity, even though it was in a situation where the return should be flicked due to flickness, such as the Defendant’s flickness, and even if it was a situation where the return ought to be flick due to flickness and flickness, he/she can see that the Defendant’s act was flick up by revealing the sexual organ or flicking a third party’s sexual humiliation in the manner that he/she seems to have committed an obscene act by flicking the Defendant.

The judgment of the court below which recognized the facts charged of this case is just and acceptable, and this part of the defendant's assertion against this is without merit.

B. Determination on the assertion of unfair sentencing

There is no change in the circumstances after appeal. In full view of all the conditions of sentencing indicated in the record, the sentence imposed by the court below against the defendant cannot be deemed unfair because the sentence imposed by the court is too unreasonable.

3. Conclusion

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.