The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Error of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, the Defendant was unsatisfing his satisfyed with his satisfy, and did not do any act of self-defense, and even if satisfyed, even if satisfyed, it was only an act within the tea, and it was not open to the tea, and thus there is no performance.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (the fine of three million won and the completion of a sexual assault treatment program) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. As to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, “patent” under Article 245 of the Criminal Act refers to a state in which many and unspecified persons can be directly aware of it, and even if many and unspecified persons have not been aware of it in reality, performance may be recognized, and furthermore, “obscenity” refers to an act contrary to the concept of sexual morality by inducing sexual humiliation and impairing normal sexual humiliation by stimulating ordinary people’s sexual desire.

(See Supreme Court Decisions 200Do4372 Decided December 22, 200, 200, 2003Do2911 Decided July 22, 2005, etc.). The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court: ① Observe E was a witness in the forepart of the Bupyeong-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, Seo-gu, 08:10 on September 18, 2014, at around 103 103 U.S., Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Incheon, Seo-gu, Incheon, 4 U.S., Ma-dong, 103, left a place where the Defendant left the front seat of the driver’s seat and was seated under the above conditions; ② Observe witness D heard the horses that he saw the Defendant’s act of self-defense from before his spouse, and was concealed at the same time; ③ At the time, the Defendant’s vehicle was parked in front of the vehicle; and ③ at the front of the road parking lot.