성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(카메라등이용촬영)등
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. When considering the fact that the defendant should work as a restaurant every day in the vicinity of the school, the punishment imposed by the court below, such as disclosing personal information or taking lectures, is too unreasonable.
2. The lower court determined that there are special circumstances in which the Defendant shall not disclose personal information to the public.
The order of disclosure of personal information was not pronounced.
However, if a conviction of a crime of violating the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes is finalized, the defendant shall be automatically a person subject to registration of personal information and shall be obligated to submit personal information to the related agency pursuant to Article 42 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes
Article 16(2) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes of the same Part provides that where a person who has committed a sexual crime is convicted of a conviction, in principle, an order to attend a course necessary for the prevention of recidivism or an order to complete a sexual assault treatment program shall be issued concurrently within 500 hours, and the lower court only issued an order to attend a course for 40 hours to a defendant pursuant to the said provision.
In light of the overall sentencing of the lower court against the Defendant, it does not change the conditions of sentencing after the lower court’s judgment, and considering various conditions of sentencing as shown in the records and arguments, the lower court’s sentencing is too inappropriate because it exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.
3. Accordingly, the Defendant’s appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is groundless.