Whether the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse, which was amended by Act No. 10391 on July 23, 2010, allows the application of the disclosure order system to crimes committed before January 1, 2010, which was enforced prior to the enforcement of the disclosure order system, is against the principle of prohibition of retroactive legislation (negative)

The Addenda to the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse ( June 9, 2009)

Defendant

Defendant and the respondent for attachment order

Attorney Lee Jong-il

Seoul High Court Decision 2010No2326, 2010No138 decided October 14, 2010

All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Part of the defendant's case

A. As to the assertion of violation of the principle of retroactive prohibition of legislation

The disclosure order system under the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse is a kind of security measure aimed at effectively preventing sex offenses against children and juveniles and protecting children and juveniles from sexual crimes by allowing anyone to peruse disclosed information about persons subject to disclosure order through the Internet, while taking measures to allow anyone to disclose their names, ages, addresses, and actual domicile (limited to Eup, Myeon, and Dong), physical information (keys and weight), photographs, and the summary of sex offenses against children and juveniles (hereinafter “disclosure information”) by using information and communications networks for a certain period. In full view of the purpose and nature of the disclosure order system, the disclosure order system is distinguishable from punishment, which is ex post facto disposition pursuing liability for the purpose of providing information on persons who committed such offenses, and thus, the principle of retroactive prohibition of legislation on punishment is not applied. Thus, even if the disclosure order system was enforced on January 1, 2010, the amendment of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse is not in violation of the principle of retroactive prohibition of legislation on punishment.

B. As to other grounds of appeal

The remaining grounds of appeal by the defendant merely criticizes the selection of evidence and the recognition of facts which belong to the exclusive jurisdiction of the court below, or is sentenced to a three-year punishment by imprisonment, and thus, the determination of the court below’s sentence is unreasonable, and all of them are not legitimate grounds of

2. Part of the attachment order case

Examining the reasoning of the judgment below in light of the records, the court below did not err by misapprehending the legal principles as to the risk of re-offending or the period of attachment, etc.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, all appeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Cha Han-sung (Presiding Justice)