The punishment sentenced by the court below (one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution) is too unreasonable.

If there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the judgment of the first instance court on the grounds of appeal, and the sentencing of the first instance is not beyond the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). There is no new circumstance to change the sentence of the lower court in the trial. In full view of the following: (a) the reasons for sentencing as stated by the lower court are the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, records of crime, motive or background of crime, frequency and period of crime, number of victims, number of circumstances after crime, etc., the sentence imposed by the lower court is not heavy, and is performed within the reasonable scope of discretion.

The crimes of paragraph (1) of the facts constituting the crime of the judgment of the court below concerning the disclosure and notification of personal information for ex officio judgment shall be applicable to "sex offenses against children or juveniles" as defined in subparagraph 2 (d) of Article 2 of the Act on

Therefore, the court below should have tried to order the disclosure or notification of personal information of the defendant pursuant to Articles 49(1) and 50(1) of the former Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (amended by Act No. 16622, Nov. 26, 2019), or exempted the disclosure or notification of personal information of the defendant pursuant to the proviso of Article 49(1) and the proviso of Article 50(1) of the same Act. However, the court below erred in failing to make any decision.

However, in this case where only the Defendant appealed, the punishment more unfavorable to the Defendant cannot be changed according to the principle of prohibition of disadvantageous change (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2017Do16734, Dec. 22, 2017). The age and social ties of the Defendant, the history of the crime, the content and motive of the crime, and the method and consequence of the crime.