The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (four years of imprisonment with labor for three years) is too unhued and unreasonable.

B. It is unreasonable for the lower court to exempt the Defendant from disclosure and notification orders, even though there are no special circumstances to prevent the disclosure or notification of the Defendant’s personal information as to unjust exemption from disclosure and notification orders.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of unreasonable sentencing, the instant crime was committed by the Defendant, who is merely 15 years of age, by bringing a runaway juvenile into the hospital rooftop, and the nature of the crime is not sufficient, nor is there a lot of possibility of criticism.

However, in full view of the following factors: (a) the Defendant led to the instant crime and reflects; (b) appears to have committed the said crime somewhat contingently during commission; (c) the Defendant agreed with the victim; (d) the Defendant has no criminal power at the lower court; and (e) the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, family relationship, environment, circumstances and degree of the crime; and (e) various circumstances indicated in the instant argument, including the circumstances after the commission of the Supreme Court’s Sentencing (three to five years and six months), etc., the sentence of the lower court is too unjustifiable and unreasonable.

Therefore, the prosecutor's above assertion is without merit.

B. As to the unjust assertion of exemption from disclosure or notification order, whether it constitutes “the case where there is a special reason to prohibit disclosure of personal information” as the exception to disclosure or notification order should be determined by comprehensively taking into account the Defendant’s age, occupation, risk of recidivism, etc., characteristics of the offender, such as the type, motive, process, consequence, seriousness of the crime, etc., characteristics of the crime, such as the crime, such as the type of the crime, process, consequence, and seriousness of the crime, degree of disadvantage and anticipated side effects of the Defendant’s entry due to disclosure or notification order, preventive effects of sexual crimes subject to

Supreme Court Decision 2011Do14676 Decided January 27, 2012