For the reasons indicated in its holding, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of violating the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse among the facts charged in the instant case.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on intentional act in the crime of violating the Act on the Protection of Children

In addition, pursuant to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment or imprisonment without prison labor for more than ten years has been imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed. Thus, in this case where a more minor sentence has been imposed on the defendant, the argument that the sentencing of the

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