A. The sentence of the lower court on the Defendant’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (the suspension of the execution of two years and six months of imprisonment, the suspension of the execution of six months of imprisonment, and the lecture attendance order of sexual assault treatment 40 hours) is too uneasible and unfair

B. It is improper for the lower court to exempt the Defendant from the disclosure notification order of personal information.

2. Determination

A. If there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court on the assertion of unfair sentencing, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). In accordance with the foregoing legal doctrine, there is no special change in the sentencing conditions compared with the original judgment on the grounds that new materials for sentencing have not been submitted in the examination room and the trial room. In full view of all of the reasons for sentencing as stated by the lower court, the lower court’s sentencing against the Defendant is too unhued and so it does not seem that the lower court exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

The prosecutor's assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.

B. As to the wrongful assertion of exemption from disclosure disclosure order, it seems that the defendant had no criminal records prior to the instant crime, and the defendant's participation in the registration of personal information and the sexual assault treatment lecture alone could have considerable effect on preventing recidivism, and it is determined that the risk of preventing sexual crimes again is less likely to be prevented.

In addition, comprehensively taking account of the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, social relationship, circumstances before and after the crime, etc., it is deemed that there are considerable disadvantages and side effects that the Defendant will suffer rather than the benefits and preventive effects expected by the disclosure order or notification order. Therefore, it is recognized that there are special circumstances that the Defendant’s personal information should not be disclosed.

The court below's decision that exempted the defendant from issuing an order to disclose personal information to the same purport is justifiable.

This part of the prosecutor's assertion is without merit.

3...