A. The sentence sentenced by the lower court (two years and six months of imprisonment, five years of suspended execution, etc.) is too unhued and unfair.

B. The lower court’s dismissal of the request for a protective observation order is unjust, since the risk of recidivism is recognized to the Defendant and the requester for the protective observation order (hereinafter “Defendant”), and thus, dismissed the request for a protective observation order.

Judgment

A. The Defendant’s crime in the part of the instant case committed an indecent act by inducing the victims who are only six to eight years of age, and by gathering them into the inner part, etc., and thus, the nature of the crime and the degree of damage suffered by the victims are harsh, and the degree of damage is somewhat minor.

shall not be deemed to exist.

Defendant has a total of six times criminal punishment, including the punishment of a fine for a crime of violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (obscenity using communications media).

However, all of the crimes of this case are recognized by the defendant, and it reflects the wrongness, and the degree of tangible force of the defendant inflicted on the victims is relatively minor.

Defendant would not actively treat and repeat alcohol addiction symptoms which caused the occurrence of the instant case.

The victims do not want to be punished for the defendant by mutual consent with the legal representatives of the victims.

There is no criminal offense beyond the fine against the defendant.

In addition, considering the various sentencing conditions and the scope of recommended sentences according to the sentencing guidelines as shown in the records and theories of this case, such as the defendant's age, sex, motive, means and consequence of the crime, the circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence sentenced by the court below cannot be deemed to be unfair because it is too appropriate and too low.

B. Articles 21-8 and 9(4)4 of the Act on the Attachment, etc. of Electronic Devices provide that when a suspended sentence or suspended sentence is rendered with respect to a specific crime case, a request for the observation order should be dismissed by judgment.