준강제추행등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.
The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.
1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant is too uneasible and unfair.
2. Article 59-3(1) of the former Act on Welfare of Persons with Disabilities (amended by Act No. 15904, Dec. 11, 2018) uniformly limits employment in welfare facilities for persons with disabilities for ten years from the date when the execution of all or part of the punishment or medical treatment and custody is terminated or suspended or exempted, but Article 59-3(1) of the former Act on Welfare of Persons with Disabilities (amended by Act No. 15904, Dec. 11, 2018; hereinafter “former Act on Welfare of Persons with Disabilities”) regulates employment in welfare facilities for persons with disabilities for ten years from the date on which the sentence of a sex offense or a sex offense against a child or juvenile (hereinafter “sexual offense”) is imposed, contrary to the previous provision, the court did not provide for an employment restriction order in cases where the court orders the restriction on employment of persons with disabilities for a fixed period of time in the case of issuing a sex offense or medical treatment and custody.
Meanwhile, Article 2 of the Addenda to the amended Act on Welfare of Persons with Disabilities provides that "The amended Act of Article 59-3 shall also apply to persons who have committed sex offenses before this Act enters into force and have not received final judgment."
Based on its stated reasoning, the lower court convicted all of the facts charged of the instant case.
However, since Article 59-3(1) of the revised Welfare Act applies to this case and the judgment of the court below did not determine whether to issue an employment restriction order for welfare facilities for the defendant and the period of employment restriction for welfare facilities for the defendant, the judgment of the court below is no longer possible.
3. Accordingly, the court below's decision has the above reasons for ex officio reversal, and revised Act on Welfare of Persons with Disabilities.