The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of two million won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. The sentence of the lower court (a fine of 2 million won, an order to complete a sexual assault treatment program for 40 hours) on the grounds of appeal is too unreasonable.

2. We examine ex officio the grounds for appeal by the defendant before determining ex officio.

Article 56(1) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse, before being amended by Act No. 15352, Jan. 16, 2018, provides that a person who was finally determined and conclusive after having been sentenced to punishment or medical treatment and custody for sex offenses against children or juveniles or sex offenses against adults (hereinafter referred to as “sexual offenses”) shall not be able to operate a child or juvenile-related institution or provide employment or de facto labor for ten years from the date on which the execution of such punishment or medical treatment and custody is terminated, suspended, or exempted.

However, Article 56(1) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse, which was amended by Act No. 15352 and enforced July 17, 2018, provides that where a sentence of punishment or medical treatment and custody is imposed for sex offense, an order to operate a child or juvenile-related institution, etc. or to prevent the said institution from operating such institution from providing employment or actual labor for a certain period from the date the execution of such punishment or medical treatment and custody is terminated, suspended or exempted (where a fine is imposed, the date on which the sentence becomes final) shall be sentenced, simultaneously with a judgment on the sex offense case.

On the other hand, Article 3 of the Addenda to the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (No. 15352, January 16, 2018) provides that "the amended provisions of Article 56 shall also apply to persons who committed sex offenses before this Act enters into force and have not been finally determined."

An employment restriction order pursuant to the above revised provision is an incidental disposition which is imposed simultaneously with a conviction of a sex offense case, and all of the judgment below should be reversed, even if there is no error in the remaining conviction part of the judgment below.