The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

However, the period of three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

It is improper that the court below ordered the defendant to disclose or notify personal information, despite special circumstances that may not disclose or notify personal information to the illegal defendant of the order to disclose or notify the summary of the grounds for appeal.

The punishment sentenced by the court below to the defendant (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

Judgment

The Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes and the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse shall, in principle, disclose and notify the personal information of all persons who have committed sexual crimes to defend our society from sexual crimes, and there are special circumstances that may not be done on an exceptional basis.

only if it is judged, it shall be exempted.

Here, there are special circumstances in which personal information shall not be disclosed, as provided for in the exception of the disclosure order and the notification order.

The issue of whether a case constitutes “a case to be determined” ought to be determined by comprehensively taking into account the Defendant’s age, occupation, and risk of recidivism, characteristics of the offense, such as the type, motive, process, consequence, seriousness of the offense, etc. of the offense, the degree of disadvantage and anticipated side effects of the Defendant’s entrance due to the disclosure or notification order, the preventive effects and effects of the sexual crime subject to registration that may be achieved therefrom, and the effects of the protection of victims from the sexual crime subject to registration (see Supreme Court Decision 2011Do163, Feb. 23, 2012). In light of the foregoing legal doctrine, the following circumstances recognized by the court below duly adopted and investigated by the evidence, namely, ① the Defendant was a first offender who had no record of punishment prior to the instant crime, and the Defendant appears to have committed the instant crime in a contingent manner against the president of the drinking house, and the attempted crime was committed.