아동복지법위반(아동에대한음행강요ㆍ매개ㆍ성희롱등)
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. Summary of the grounds for appeal: 6 months of imprisonment with prison labor, two years of suspended execution, and 40 hours of the Child Abuse Treatment Course);
2. Determination
A. In light of the circumstances favorable to the Defendant, or the nature and circumstances of the instant crime, etc., the determination of the sentence imposed by the court below is acceptable in full view of the following factors: (a) the determination of the argument during the sentencing; (b) the confession of the instant crime by the Defendant; (c) the confession of the instant crime by the Defendant at the time of the trial; and (d) the receipt of the victim test; and (c) there is no record of criminal punishment in the past; and (d) the sentencing conditions under Article 51 of
B. The lower court ex officio determined whether to issue an employment restriction order to the Defendant pursuant to Article 29-3 of the Child Welfare Act, but omitted the determination. However, since the lower court appealed only to the Defendant, the appellate court cannot impose a new tax pursuant to Article 368 of the Criminal Procedure Act, the lower court did not reverse the lower judgment on the ground of the omission (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2017Do16734, Dec. 22, 2017). 3.