A. In light of the fact that the Defendant (unlawful in sentencing) recognized the mistake of the Defendant, and there is no record of criminal punishment, etc., the lower court’s sentence that sentenced the Defendant to order the program of sexual assault treatment for 40 hours or more is too unreasonable.

B. It is unreasonable for the court below to exempt the Defendant from an order to disclose the registered information without any specific reasons in light of the prosecutor’s (1) exemption order for disclosure disclosure, the content of the crime of this case, possibility of recidivism, etc.

(2) In light of the fact that the Defendant’s crime of this case committed the crime of this case was only behind the victim in the subway train, and that the victim’s her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her

2. Determination

A. According to Articles 47(1) and 49(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes, and Articles 49(1) and 50(1) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse, in principle, a prosecutor’s disclosure of personal information on a sex offender is required, and there are special circumstances that may not be an exception.

If it is judged, it shall be removed.

There is a special reason not to disclose personal information.

In the case of judgment, whether it constitutes "a defendant's age, occupation, risk of recidivism, etc., characteristics of the offender, such as the type, motive, process, result, seriousness of the crime, etc., characteristics of the crime, such as disclosure order or notification order, the degree of disadvantage and anticipated side effects of the defendant's entrance, effects of preventing sexual crimes subject to registration, and effects of protecting the victim from the sexual crimes subject to registration.