The judgment below

Part concerning Defendant A and B shall be reversed.

Defendant

A Imprisonment with prison labor of one year and six months, and Defendant B.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal each unfair sentencing (the original judgment: Defendant A- one year and six months of imprisonment; 40 hours of an order to complete a child abuse treatment program; - one year of imprisonment; - one year of order to complete a child abuse treatment program; 40 hours of order to complete a child abuse treatment program; - Defendant C - fine of 15 million won);

2. Determination

A. Defendant A and B committed the instant crime, rather than an infant care teacher who is obligated to protect the body and body of the victimized children and to rear them healthy, is not likely to have committed physical or mental abuse against the victimized children or neglected to supervise them, and the crime was committed several times over a short period of time, and the fact that the victimized children and their parents seem to have suffered a large number of mental shocks are disadvantageous to the Defendants.

However, in light of the following: (a) the Defendants recognized all of their crimes for the first time in the trial, and against the fact that the guardians of the victimized children do not want to be punished against the Defendants; (b) the Defendants left the child-care center at present; (c) the Defendants have no record of criminal punishment; and (d) the Defendants’ age, character and conduct, environment, method of crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., which are the conditions for sentencing as indicated in the records and arguments of this case, the sentence imposed by the lower court is unreasonable.

B. Defendant C neglected the duty to manage the child abuse committed by Defendant A and B, who is a child care teacher, as the head of the instant child care center, by discovering the child abuse committed by Defendant C and B, and taking appropriate measures therefor, and the victimized children and their parents did not receive any accusation separately.

In addition to the circumstances indicated by the lower court, no new circumstance exists to change the sentence of the lower court in the trial, and the age, character and conduct, environment, and motive and motive of the crime of the Defendant C.