The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, by misunderstanding the facts, did not have committed any obscene act as described in the facts charged, only because he did not return it by hand.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (2 million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the difference between the original court and the appellate court’s method of assessing the credibility of a witness’s statement in light of the contents of the original judgment and the evidence duly examined in the original judgment, the lower court’s judgment was clearly erroneous in determining the credibility of the witness’s statement in light of the contents of the original judgment and the evidence duly examined in the original judgment.

If there are extenuating circumstances to see the lower court’s judgment as to the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the lower court, or in full view of the results of the examination of evidence at the lower court and the results of additional examination conducted until the closing of oral pleadings, it is not significantly unfair to maintain the lower court’s judgment as they are, the appellate court should not arbitrarily reverse the lower court’s judgment on the sole ground that the lower court’s judgment as to the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the lower court is different from the appellate court’s judgment (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2006Do4994, Nov. 24, 2006; 201Do5313, Jun. 14, 2012). Although the Defendant asserted to the same effect, the lower court asserted to the same effect, the lower court, despite its adoption by three witnesses, and hearing their statements and

After the judgment, the defendant's above assertion was rejected.

Examining the above facts-finding and judgment of the court below in comparison with the records, closely, the witness F was exposed to the sexual organ and obscenity while the defendant got on the job.

The witness G testified that the defendant's hand was on the part of his gender and was in a attitude that he was on the part of his attitude.

The testimony has been made (in the light of the above testimony, it is returned).