The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

The defendant's 40-hour child abuse.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing)

A. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (ten months of imprisonment) is excessively unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Judgment ex officio on the defendant and prosecutor's grounds for appeal concerning an order to restrict employment shall be deemed ex officio prior to the judgment.

A. The main text of Article 29-3(1) of the Child Welfare Act, which was amended by Act No. 1589, Dec. 11, 2018, effective June 12, 2019, provides that “in cases where a person is sentenced to imprisonment or medical treatment and custody for committing a child abuse-related crime, the court shall render a sentence (referring to a notification of a summary order in cases of a summary order) to operate the following facilities or institutions or to ensure that the person is unable to provide employment or actual labor to a child-related institution for a certain period from the date when the execution of the sentence or medical treatment and custody is terminated or suspended or exempted (including a summary order) is suspended or exempted by a judgment (referring to the date on which a penalty becomes final and conclusive where a fine is sentenced).” Article 2(1) of the Addenda to the above Act provides that “The amended provisions of Article 29-3 shall apply to a person who committed a child abuse-related crime before this Act enters into force:

The crime of physical abuse of this case against the Defendant’s wife H, constitutes “child abuse-related crimes” committed before the enforcement of the above Child Welfare Act, and simultaneously with the judgment of this case, the order of restriction on employment of the Defendant to the child-related agencies should be issued.

B. Inasmuch as the former Child Welfare Act before the enforcement of June 12, 2019 did not have each provision regarding a child-related institution’s employment restriction order, the lower court issued an employment restriction order to the Defendant with respect to child-related institutions, etc., and issued an employment restriction order with respect to child-related institutions.