All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

The punishment of the accused shall be determined by imprisonment with prison labor for ten months.

The defendant shall be 40 hours.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) misunderstanding of facts (the obscenity of the second instance judgment) (the obscenity of the public performance) did not have any fact by opening up a softer which was put into custody at the time of the instant case, and did not have taken part of a bridge for exposure to sexual organ. Nevertheless, the second instance judgment convicting the Defendant of such fact was erroneous. 2) The Defendant was in a mental and physical state due to mental disorder such as depression and ADD at the time of each of the instant crimes.

3) According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, each sentence of the lower court (the first judgment: imprisonment with prison labor for August, etc., and the second judgment: imprisonment with prison labor for April, etc.) against the Defendant of unreasonable sentencing, the Prosecutor 1 of the lower court found the Defendant not guilty of this part of the facts charged, even though the Defendant was found to have not returned to another person’s building in the status of exposing sexual organ, based on the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, the lower court acquitted the Defendant of the facts charged, or erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine.

2. Each sentence of the lower court on the accused of unreasonable sentencing is unfair because it is too unhued.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor ex officio, this Court decided to hold the above appeal cases by combining the above appeal cases against the defendant. Each of the two concurrent offenses deliberated in the trial in the first sentence of Article 37 of the Criminal Act is in a concurrent offense relationship under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and a sentence shall be imposed within the scope of a limited term of punishment, so the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained.

Despite such reasons for ex officio reversal, the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts, mental or physical disorder, and prosecutor's argument of mistake or misunderstanding of legal principles is still subject to this court'

3. Judgment on mistake of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles, and mental or physical disability argument

A. Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts.