The judgment below

The part of the defendant's case shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than three years and six months.

. against the Defendant.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment and imprisonment for three years and six months) sentenced by the court below to the defendant and the person against whom the attachment order was requested (hereinafter referred to as the "defendants") is too unreasonable.

It is also unfair that the court below ordered disclosure and notification of personal information and attachment of an electronic device.

2. Determination

A. According to Article 29-3(1) of the Child Welfare Act (amended by Act No. 1589, Dec. 11, 2018; enacted as of June 12, 2019; Act No. 15889, Jun. 12, 2019) regarding the part of the defendant's case, where the court orders a child-related institution to operate a child-related institution for a certain period not exceeding 10 years or to provide employment or actual labor to a child-related institution, it shall be issued simultaneously with the judgment of the case related to the child abuse, but the order of employment restriction may not be issued in cases where the risk of recidivism is remarkably low or where there are special circumstances that need not restrict employment.

In addition, according to Article 2 (1) of the Addenda to the same Act, the above amendment provision of Article 29-3 applies to a person who committed a crime related to child abuse before the law enters into force and has not received a final and conclusive judgment.

However, in the instant case, although the Defendant does not fall under the “guardian” specified as the subject of child abuse crime under Article 2 subparag. 4 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Child Abuse Crimes, the instant crime does not constitute “child abuse-related crimes” under Article 3 subparag. 7-2 of the Child Welfare Act, the lower court erred by ordering the Defendant to restrict employment for five years by applying the main sentence of Article 29-3(1) thereof.

The judgment on the employment restriction order under Article 29-3 (1) of the Child Welfare Act is an incidental disposition to be sentenced simultaneously with a conviction, and the judgment of the court below should be reversed even if there is no error in the remaining part of the defendant case.