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.

The Defendant and the claimant for the observation order to protect the victim (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant”) of the summary of the grounds for appeal were in a state of mental disorder under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime.

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

It is unfair for the court below to issue an order to disclose or notify personal information to the defendant, even though there are special circumstances that the defendant should not disclose or notify personal information to the defendant in violation of the disclosure or notification order.

The proviso to Article 16 (3) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes for Ex officio Determination shall not be concurrently imposed where a sexual offender is subject to an order to complete a program under Article 9-2 (1) 4 of the Act on the Protection and Observation of Specific Criminal Offenders and Electronic Monitoring, Etc.

“......”

In this regard, even though the court below imposed an order to complete a program under Article 21-4 and Article 9-2 (1) 4 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes on the defendant as an obligation to observe an order to observe a specific criminal suspect, the court below again imposed the order to complete a program under the main sentence of Article 16 (2) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes.

If so, the court below imposed double orders to complete the program, and judged again whether to issue orders to complete the program in the part of the defendant's case, or to order the order to complete the program in the part of the request for an observation order. Thus, the court below'

However, the defendant's argument about mental disorder is still subject to the judgment of this court, despite the above reasons for reversal of authority.

Various circumstances, such as the background of the instant crime, the means and method of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court regarding the Defendant’s assertion of mental disorder.