The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and four months.

Sexual assault against the defendant for forty hours.

1. In light of the following: (a) the gist of the grounds for appeal by the Defendant and his defense counsel (unfair sentencing) recognizes and reflects the Defendant’s mistake; (b) the Defendant committed each of the instant crimes by contingency under the influence of alcohol; and (c) the degree of prosecution is relatively minor, the sentence of the lower court that sentenced the order to complete a sexual assault treatment program program program program program program program program program program program program program program program program program program program program program program program program program program program program program program program program

2. In full view of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant was sentenced to one year to imprisonment with prison labor on August 29, 2014 at the credit support of Suwon Franchisor, etc.; (b) the Defendant committed each of the instant crimes during the period of repeated crimes after the execution of the sentence was completed on June 11, 2015; (c) the Defendant was subject to criminal punishment for the same kind of crime; (d) the Defendant’s age, sexual behavior, environment, degree of damage; (e) the degree of damage was not compensated; and (e) the Defendant’s motive and circumstance after the commission of the crime; and (e) all of the sentencing conditions specified in the instant records and pleadings, such as the record and oral argument, the order to complete the sexual assault treatment program for a period of one year and forty (40) hours, which was sentenced by the lower court, shall be deemed reasonable;

However, there are other special circumstances in which the disclosure of personal information may not be notified to the accused pursuant to Articles 47(1) and 49(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes, the proviso to Article 49(1) and the proviso to Article 50(1) of the Act on the Protection, etc. of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse, when comprehensively considering the Defendant’s age, occupation, risk of repeating a crime, motive, progress and seriousness of the crime, degree of disadvantage and anticipated side effects of the Defendant’s injury due to the disclosure order or notification order, the preventive effect and effect of the sexual crime subject to registration that may be achieved therefrom, the effect of the protection of the victim, etc.

Since this part of the argument is reasonable.

3. Conclusion.