The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

Sexual assault against the defendant for 80 hours.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. At the time of the instant crime, the Defendant was drunk and was in a state of mental disability.

B. The sentence of unfair sentencing (one year of imprisonment, five years of disclosure of information) by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the Defendant’s ex officio, the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse was amended by Act No. 10260 on April 15, 2010, and Article 13(1) of the same Act provides that where the court declares a conviction against a person who committed a sex offense against a child or juvenile, the court shall concurrently order the person who committed the sex offense to attend a lecture or to attend a sexual assault treatment program within the extent of 300 hours. According to Article 2 of the Addenda of the same Act, the above order to attend a lecture or order to attend a program shall be applied to the person who first committed the sex offense against a child or juvenile for the first time after April 15, 2010.

Meanwhile, Article 21(2) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse, which was amended by Act No. 11572 on December 18, 2012 and enforced from June 19, 2013, provides that an order to attend a course or order to complete a sexual assault treatment program shall be issued concurrently within 500 hours, and Article 4 of the Addenda of the Act provides that the amended provisions of Article 21 of the Act shall apply from the person who was first convicted after the enforcement of the Act.

Since the facts charged of this case committed a quasi-indecent act by force against female juveniles under the age of 15 who are 15 who committed a sex offense against a child or juvenile on February 3, 2013 after the enforcement of the above Act, the defendant was guilty of the facts charged of this case and sentenced the defendant to a conviction, the order to attend a course or order to complete a program shall be issued concurrently.

Nevertheless, the lower court acknowledged the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of the instant case, but ordered the Defendant to attend the course.