The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

Provided, That the above punishment shall be imposed for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In view of the fact that the Defendant committed the instant crime when he was found to be guilty, and that he made efforts to reach an agreement with the victim, the sentence of the lower court’s sentence (ten months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor 1) Since the Defendant’s exemption from disclosure and notification orders is likely to repeat an offense, it is unreasonable for the lower court to exempt the Defendant from issuing an order to disclose and notify his/her personal registration information. 2) In view of the fact that the Defendant attempted to commit rape by inducing the victim using a trust relationship with the victim, the sentence of the lower court is too uneasible.

2. Determination

A. As to the wrongful assertion of exemption from disclosure or notification order, whether the case constitutes “any special circumstance that may not disclose or notify personal information” as the exception to disclosure or notification order under the proviso of Articles 49(1) and 50(1) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse 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 disclosure or notification order, degree of disadvantage and anticipated side effects of the Defendant’s injury due to disclosure or notification order, preventive effects of sexual crimes subject to registration, and effects of protecting victims from sexual crimes subject to registration.

(see Supreme Court Decision 201Do14676, Jan. 27, 2012). In light of such legal doctrine, the following circumstances acknowledged by the health care unit and records, namely, the Defendant has no record of punishment for sexual assault crimes, and the Defendant may expect the effect of recidivism even through an order to attend the sexual assault treatment lecture concurrently imposed on the Defendant, and there is room for correction and improvement of the Defendant.