A. The sentence of the lower court that is unfair in sentencing (two years and six months of imprisonment, three years of suspended execution, etc.) is deemed unreasonable.

B. It is unreasonable for the court below to exempt the defendant from the disclosure and notification order of personal information, despite the risk of recidivism in light of the planning and frequency of unfair crimes that are exempted from disclosure and notification order, relationship between the defendant and the victim, age of the victim, degree of damage, etc.

2. Determination

A. The lower court rendered a sentence by taking account of the circumstances favorable to the Defendant, as follows: ① the crime of this case was committed by the Defendant’s indecent act against the victim, who is a sheshel’s shel's shel's shel's shel's shel's shel's shel's shel's shel's shel's shel's shel't good character; ② the Defendant's her shel's shel's her own shel's shel's shel's shel's shel's shel's shel's shel's shel's shel's herl's shel's her own shel's herl's her own

In full view of the following facts: (a) there is no new circumstance or special change in circumstances that may be reflected in sentencing even when the court has reached the court; (b) the victim’s person in parental authority does not want the punishment against the defendant; and (c) the Defendant’s age, sex behavior, environment, motive, means, and consequence of the crime; and (d) the circumstances after the crime; and (c) the record of the crime, etc., the court below’s sentence cannot be deemed unfair

B. It can be seen by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court regarding the unfair argument regarding exemption from disclosure of personal information.