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

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Criminal facts

The Defendant, from around 03:32 on July 24, 2020 to around 03:37 on the same day, set up a fluor D (tentative name) in front of the opening door of the first floor of the building in Gwanak-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City from around 03:30 on the same day, and opened a fluor in front of the Defendant on his left hand by leaving the fluor and leaving the fluor.

I performed the above act.

Accordingly, the Defendant publicly committed an obscene act.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police with respect to D;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to report internal investigation (C CCTV images verification);

1. Article 245 of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime, Article 245 of the Criminal Act, and the choice of fines;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The main sentence of Article 16 (2) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes Committed to Order;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is that the criminal defendant's crime is not less complicated in light of its circumstances, contents, etc.

However, the defendant has no record of being punished for committing a crime against his/her mistake while committing a crime.

The punishment as ordered shall be determined by taking into account the above circumstances and the Defendant’s age, sex and environment, the background and consequence of the crime, the circumstances after the crime, and other circumstances that form the conditions for sentencing as shown in the instant records and theories, such as the circumstances after the crime.

In full view of the Defendant’s age, occupation, risk of recidivism, type of crime, motive, process of crime, the degree and expected side effects of the Defendant’s disadvantage due to an employment restriction order, the prevention of sexual crimes that may be achieved therefrom, and the effect of protecting the victim, there are special circumstances in which the Defendant’s employment may not be restricted.

Since it is determined, the proviso of Article 56(1) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse and the proviso of Article 59-3(1) of the Welfare of Persons with Disabilities Act does not impose an employment restriction order on the defendant.