The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment with prison labor for six months and two years of suspended execution) of the lower court is deemed to be too uneasy and unfair.

2. Determination

A. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court’s judgment on the assertion of unfair sentencing, and the sentencing of the first instance court is not beyond the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). There is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the original judgment, as the new sentencing materials have not been submitted in the trial. In full view of all the reasons for sentencing as stated by the lower court, it cannot be deemed that the lower court’s sentencing is too unfeasible, and thus, exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

B. Article 59-3(1) of the Act on Welfare of Persons with Disabilities, which uniformly prescribed the employment restrictions on welfare facilities for persons with disabilities for the ten-year period for children, juveniles, or persons sentenced to the ex officio determination on an employment restriction order under the Act on Welfare of Persons with Disabilities, was amended by Act No. 15904, Dec. 11, 2018; and Article 59-3(1) and (2) of the Act on Welfare of Persons with Disabilities, upon sentence of a punishment for an individual sex offense case, the court has set a different period of employment restrictions within a ten-year period in consideration of the risk of recidivism (hereinafter “Amended Act on Welfare of Persons with Disabilities”); Article 2 of the Addenda (Act No. 15904, Dec. 11, 2018) of the Act on Welfare of Persons with Disabilities (amended by Act No. 15904) provides that “The amended provisions of Article 59-3 shall also apply to persons who have committed sex crimes before June 12, 2019.

Therefore, as the revised Act on Welfare of Persons with Disabilities applies to this case after the sentence of the lower judgment, it is necessary to issue a sentence to the defendant who committed a sex offense subject to adults, and at the same time, to additionally judge whether to issue an employment restriction order on welfare facilities for persons with disabilities and the period of employment restriction.