1. In light of the contents, form, and purport of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (hereinafter “Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes”), and the legal nature, etc. of the judgment of suspended sentence, the obligation to submit personal information of a person subject to registration is not separately imposed by a court, but when a judgment of suspended sentence becomes final and conclusive due to a sex offense subject to registration, the judgment of suspended sentence cannot be deemed excluded from the judgment of suspended sentence. Therefore, even in cases where a judgment of suspended sentence is rendered on a sex offense subject to registration, the said judgment of suspended sentence becomes final and conclusive, and the said person has the obligation to submit personal information as a person subject to registration. However, if

In addition, since a court does not separately impose a duty to submit personal information on a person subject to registration, it is meaningful that a court that declares a judgment of conviction must inform that a person subject to registration should submit personal information. Therefore, even if a court erred in the omission of notification or its content, etc. while rendering a judgment of conviction, it may rectify errors by newly notifying that a person subject to registration should submit personal information without destroying the judgment due to its reason. Thus, the ground of appeal disputing errors in its object, content, procedure, etc. in relation to the notification of the first instance court or the lower court’s duty to submit personal information constitutes a matter that does not affect the judgment, and does not constitute a legitimate ground of appeal (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2014Do3564, Nov. 13, 2014).

2. According to the records, the first instance court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case, which is subject to the registration of personal information under the Act on Special Cases Concerning Sexual Violence, and notified the Defendant that the obligation to submit personal information arises only when the suspension of sentence is invalidated, while suspending a sentence of a fine of KRW 4 million against the Defendant. ② As to this, the prosecutor erred in the misapprehension of the legal principle that the first instance court should submit personal information as well as a fine, and appealed as the sentencing is too unjustifiable, and the sentencing is unreasonable. ③ The lower court’s decision did not affect the judgment, but did not err in the misapprehension of the legal principle that the first instance court suspended the duty to submit personal information as it did not affect the judgment, but did not dismiss the prosecutor’s appeal, and that the Defendant is subject to the registration of personal information, and thus, the Defendant is obligated to submit personal information.

As such, the lower court’s determination is justifiable in line with the legal doctrine as seen earlier, and the ground of appeal seeking the reversal of the lower judgment’s judgment upon disputing the notification of obligation to submit personal information is not a legitimate ground of appeal, and thus, it cannot be accepted.

3. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Ko Young-han (Presiding Justice)