성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(업무상위력등에의한추행)
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (defendants) of the lower court’s punishment (five million won of a fine and forty hours of a sexual assault treatment program) is too unreasonable;
(The defendant asserts only unfair sentencing in the trial after remanding the case as a ground for appeal).
A. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged and ordered the Defendant to complete a fine of KRW 5 million and an order to complete a sexual assault treatment program of KRW 40 million.
B. The judgment of the court below prior to remanding the case on the ground of erroneous determination of facts and unreasonable sentencing by only the defendant, and the court prior to remand rejected the defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts, but judged that the defendant should be subject to an employment restriction order pursuant to Articles 3 and 56(1) of the Addenda of the former Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse, which was amended by Act No. 15352, Jan. 16, 2018, the court below ex officio reversed the judgment of the court below and rendered a judgment imposing an employment restriction order for three years on the children
C. As to the judgment of the party prior to the remanding of the judgment, only the defendant filed a final appeal on the part of the case, on the grounds of violation of the rules of evidence and misapprehension of the legal principles as to the prohibition of disadvantageous change
The Supreme Court rejected the defendant's incomplete hearing and misapprehension of legal principles as to the part of the defendant's case, but if the defendant issues an employment restriction order to the defendant, the judgment of the court before remanding the case, which sentenced the three-year employment restriction order, is judged to be erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the principle of prohibition of disadvantageous change and remanded
3. The instant crime of determining unfair sentencing is an indecent act by force against the victim who was under his protection and supervision while working as a public official of the Agricultural Technology Center B, and the relevant case is not less minor, and the victim.