The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

Sexual assault, 80 hours against the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence of the lower court (eight months of imprisonment, 80 hours of completing sexual assault treatment programs, 2 years of employment restriction) is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the grounds for appeal by the accused and the prosecutor ex officio shall be examined earlier.

According to Article 29-3(1) of the Child Welfare Act, in cases where a court declares a sentence or medical treatment and custody for committing a crime related to child abuse, it shall, by judgment, declare an order to operate a child-related institution during the employment restriction period or not to provide employment or actual labor to a child-related institution (hereinafter referred to as “employment restriction order”).

In addition, according to Article 3 subparagraph 7-2 of the same Act, “child abuse-related crime” refers to a crime of child abuse under Article 2 subparagraph 4 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Child Abuse Crimes or a crime under Articles 250 through 255 of the Criminal Act against a child.

The crime of this case is committed against a child under 13 years of age, but the defendant is not a victim's guardian, so long as the crime of this case is committed against a child under subparagraph 4 (l) of Article 2 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Child Abuse, i.e., child abuse by his/her guardian, which does not fall under any of the crimes of Article 71 (1)

Therefore, as long as the defendant cannot be deemed to have committed a crime related to child abuse, the court below sentenced the defendant to a two-year employment restriction order against a child-related institution, since the court below sentenced the defendant to a two-year employment restriction order against a child-related institution, the judgment below cannot be maintained any more.

3. The judgment of the court below is based on the above reasons for ex officio reversal, and Article 364 of the Criminal Procedure Act is not applicable to the defendant and prosecutor's assertion of unfair sentencing.