The judgment below

The part of the defendant's case shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six years.

The defendant shall be 40 hours.

1. The court below rendered a judgment dismissing the prosecutor’s request with respect to the part of the defendant’s case for which the request for attachment order was sought, and the part of the case for which the request for attachment order was filed was appealed only by the defendant, and thus, the court below excluded the part for which the request for attachment order was filed from the scope of the trial of this court notwithstanding Article 9(8) of the Act on Probation and Electronic Monitoring

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant did not have sexual intercourse with the victim D.

Nevertheless, the court below found the defendant guilty of violating the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (compact for the disabled) based on the statement made by the victim D without credibility. In this regard, the court below erred by misunderstanding of facts.

B. The lower court’s sentencing (six years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

3. Determination

A. The main sentence of Article 59-3(1) of the Act on Welfare of Persons with Disabilities (Act No. 15904), effective as of June 12, 2019, provides that when the court imposes a punishment for a sex crime (referring to a sexual crime under Article 2(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes or a sex offense against children and juveniles under Article 2 subparag. 2 of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse; hereinafter the same shall apply), an order to operate welfare facilities for persons with disabilities or to prohibit them from providing employment or actual labor to welfare facilities for persons with disabilities for a certain period (hereinafter referred to as “employment restriction order on welfare

In addition, Article 2 of the Addenda of the same Act ( December 11, 2018) provides that "the amended provisions of Article 59-3 shall apply to persons who have committed sex offenses before this Act enters into force and have not been finally and conclusively determined."

This case constitutes a sex offense and simultaneously with the judgment of this case.