A. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (three years of the suspended sentence of two years and six months) is deemed to be too unhutiled and unfair.

B. It is unreasonable for the court below to exempt the disclosure notification order, in the absence of special circumstances that could not disclose the personal information of the defendant who was unreasonably exempted from disclosure notification order.

2. Determination

A. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court’s unfair assertion of sentencing, and the first instance court’s sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015, etc.). Based on the foregoing legal doctrine, the lower court, based on the foregoing, determined the sentence by comprehensively taking into account all the circumstances favorable to the Defendant and disadvantageous circumstances, as stated in its reasoning.

In addition to the circumstances indicated by the lower court, no new circumstance exists to change the sentence of the lower court in the trial, and considering the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive and means of a crime, the substance and consequence of a crime, and all of the sentencing factors indicated in the instant argument, including the circumstances after a crime, etc., the lower court’s sentence is too unfilled and so it exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

It does not seem that it does not appear.

Therefore, the prosecutor's improper argument of sentencing is without merit.

B. The court below's unjust assertion that exemption from disclosure disclosure notification order is unfair, and the defendant's act is divided and reflected in his/her crime, and the defendant's age, social relationship, etc. can prevent the defendant from repeating the crime even through the registration of personal information of the defendant and the lecture of sexual assault treatment.

In full view of the fact that there are special circumstances in which the disclosure of personal information of the defendant should not be disclosed.

Based on the judgment, the defendant exempted the disclosure notification order of personal information against the defendant.

Examining the above judgment of the court below in light of the records, the judgment of the court below is just, and the prosecutor's above assertion is without merit.

(c).