The main sentence of Article 37 (1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (hereinafter referred to as the "Act") provides that the court shall sentence any person falling under any of the following subparagraphs (excluding persons subject to disclosure of information under Article 38 of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse; hereinafter referred to as "persons subject to disclosure") to disclose disclosed information, such as name, age, address, etc. described in paragraph (3) of the same Article through an information and communications network during the registration period (hereinafter referred to as "order to disclose information") simultaneously with the judgment of the sexual crime case, and the court shall order any person subject to disclosure of information, among persons subject to disclosure of information, to notify of the disclosure information, such as the person who committed sexual crimes subject to disclosure, during the disclosure period, to notify the residents of the information in Eup/Myeon/Dong where the person subject to disclosure of information such as disclosure is residing (hereinafter referred to as "order to notify information") simultaneously with the judgment of the sexual crime case subject to disclosure. The proviso to each of the above Article provides that "any special circumstance shall not be disclosed".

Here, whether a case constitutes “the disclosure of personal information” as an exception to an disclosure order and notification order ought to be determined by comprehensively taking account of the Defendant’s age, occupation, risk of recidivism, etc.’s characteristic, such as the type, motive, process, consequence, seriousness of the crime, etc. of the crime, characteristics of the crime, such as disclosure order or notification order, the degree of disadvantage and anticipated side effects of the Defendant’s disadvantage due to the disclosure order or notification order, the preventive effect of the sexual crime subject to registration that may be achieved therefrom, and the effect of protecting victims of the sexual crime subject to registration (see Supreme Court Decision 2011Do14676, Jan. 27, 2012, etc.).

In light of the above legal principles and records, it is justified that the court below's failure to issue an order to disclose or notify information to the defendant on the grounds that the court below acknowledged the facts charged by indecent act of this case against the defendant, but judged that there are special circumstances that the defendant should not disclose personal information to the public. It is justified in the application of the proviso of Article 37 (1) of the Act and the proviso of Article 41 (1) of the Act. There is no

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

Justices Lee In-bok (Presiding Justice)