The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for up to six months.

except that, for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment with prison labor for six months, suspended execution for two years, probation, and order to attend a lecture for the prevention of recidivism against child abuse) of the lower court is too uneased and unreasonable;

2. We examine ex officio prior to rendering judgment on the grounds for appeal ex officio.

Article 29-3(1) of the former Child Welfare Act (amended by Act No. 1589, Dec. 11, 2018; hereinafter “former Child Welfare Act”) provides that a person who has been sentenced to punishment or medical treatment and custody for a child abuse-related crime shall not be able to operate any of the following facilities or institutions (hereinafter “child-related institutions”) or provide employment or actual labor to a child-related institution, and uniformly sets the period during which it is not able to provide its operation, employment or actual labor (hereinafter “employment restriction period”) at a uniform of 10 years, but Article 29-3(1) of the Child Welfare Act (amended by Act No. 1589, Dec. 11, 2018; hereinafter “Revised Child Welfare Act”) enacted on June 12, 2019 (hereinafter “amended Child Welfare Act”), unlike the previous provision, where a court declares a child-related institution’s employment restriction order at the same time, and at the same time does not clearly lower the risk of re-offending the employment restriction order.

Meanwhile, Article 2(1) of the Addenda to the amended Child Welfare Act provides that “The amended provisions of Article 29-3 shall also apply to a person who commits a crime related to child abuse and has not been finally and conclusively determined before this Act enters into force.”

This case constitutes a child abuse-related crime. In this case, if a sentence is imposed on the defendant, whether an employment restriction order against a child-related institution should be issued simultaneously with a judgment regarding the employment restriction period pursuant to Article 29-3(1) of the Child Welfare Act.