The judgment below

The guilty portion shall be reversed.

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

except that from the date of this judgment.

1. The lower court dismissed the prosecution against the violation of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, Etc. among the facts charged in the instant case, and convicted the remainder of the facts charged.

However, among the judgment below, the defendant and the prosecutor appealed from each of the judgment below on the grounds of unfair sentencing, and the dismissal of prosecution by the defendant and the prosecutor did not appeal both the defendant and the prosecutor, thereby making a separate decision.

Therefore, the scope of the court's judgment is limited to the judgment of conviction.

2. Summary of grounds for appeal (the accused and the prosecutor): Imprisonment with prison labor for not more than ten months, suspension of execution of two years, participation in the sexual assault treatment lecture, 40 hours, and 3 years restricted on employment;

3. Article 59-3(1) and (2) of the Act on Welfare of Persons with Disabilities, which was amended by Act No. 15904, Dec. 11, 2018, and enforced from June 12, 2019, provides that where a court issues a sentence of imprisonment or medical treatment and custody for a sex offense, it shall simultaneously issue an employment restriction order to prevent persons with disabilities from operating welfare facilities, or from providing employment or actual labor to persons with welfare facilities for a given period not exceeding 10 years, but shall not issue an employment restriction order in cases where the risk of recidivism is significantly low or any other special circumstance that does not restrict employment exists.

However, Article 2 of the Addenda to the above amended Act provides that Article 59-3 of the same Act shall apply to persons who have committed a sex offense and failed to obtain a final and conclusive judgment prior to the enforcement thereof. Of the facts charged in this case, some of the charges in this case are sex offenses and need to deliberate on whether to issue an employment restriction order simultaneously with a judgment setting a period of employment restriction pursuant to Article 59-3(1) of the Welfare of Disabled Persons Act.

Article 59-3 (1) of the Welfare of Disabled Persons Act.