The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (two years of suspended sentence in the month of imprisonment with prison labor, two million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The favorable circumstances in favor of the reasons for appeal: The defendant shows his attitude to recognize and reflect each of the crimes in this case.

The health of defendants is not good.

Unfavorable circumstances: the Defendant committed each of the crimes of this case without being aware of even during the period of repeated crime.

The sentencing criteria are not set for the crime of violation of the Act on the Protection and Observation of Specific Criminal Offenders and Electronic Devices, including the above favorable circumstances, unfavorable circumstances, the Defendant’s age, character and character environment, the motive and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime.

In full view of the above, it is not recognized that the sentence imposed by the court below is too unreasonable because the sentence imposed by the defendant is too large.

B. As indicated in the facts of the crime in the judgment of the court below, the Defendant was sentenced to three years of imprisonment on November 14, 2012 by the Busan High Court for violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (rapes against the disabled), and the above judgment became final and conclusive on February 14, 2013 and became final and conclusive on February 7, 2015, and committed each of the instant crimes within three years since the execution of the sentence was completed, and the Defendant committed each of the instant crimes within the period of three years from the date of the completion of the above execution. Thus, the Defendant constitutes a person under a suspended execution under the proviso of Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act.

Nevertheless, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the disqualifications for the suspended sentence and thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

However, in this case where only the defendant appealed, the punishment of the court below shall be determined more disadvantageous than that of the court below in accordance with the principle of prohibition of disadvantageous alteration under Article 368 of the Criminal Procedure Act.