The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

Sexual assault, 40 hours against the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence of the lower court (two years of imprisonment, 40 hours of completion of sexual assault treatment programs) is too unreasonable.

B. The prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court should be too unfluent so that it is unfair, and seized gallonians should be confiscated.

2. On October 19, 2015 and September 2018, the lower court applied Article 14(1) of the former Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (amended by Act No. 17264, May 19, 2020; hereinafter “Prior Notice Act”) that was enforced at the time of sentencing on the criminal facts in violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (hereinafter “Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes”).

However, Article 14(1) of the Act provides for a statutory penalty of not more than five years or not more than 30 million won, but Article 14(1) of the former Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (amended by Act No. 15977, Dec. 18, 2018; hereinafter “former Act”) provides a statutory penalty of not more than five years or a fine not exceeding ten million won. As such, Article 14(1) of the former Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes shall apply to the above criminal facts prior to the enforcement of the Act at the time of sentence.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is erroneous in applying the law more severe than the old law to the above criminal facts prior to the enforcement of the law at the time of sentence, and the judgment of the court below is no longer maintained.

3. Accordingly, the court below's decision is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant and the prosecutor's assertion of unfair sentencing, and it is again decided as follows after oral argument.

[Discied reasoning of the judgment] Criminal facts and the summary of evidence recognized by the court below and the summary of evidence are the same as the corresponding column of the judgment below. Thus, they are cited as it is in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Criminal facts;