The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

Sexual assault against the defendant for 80 hours.

The sentence (five years of imprisonment) imposed by the court below on the defendant is too unreasonable.

Before determining the grounds for appeal ex officio, the lower court convicted the Defendant of the instant charges by applying Article 324 of the Criminal Act (amended by Act No. 13719, Jan. 6, 2016; hereinafter “former Criminal Act”) with respect to coercion of the Defendant by threatening the victim and forcing the victim to perform an act not obligated to do so.

Article 324 of the former Criminal Code provides that a person who interferes with the exercise of rights by violence or intimidation or makes another person perform an unobligatory act shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than five years.

“The provision was defined as “...”

Article 324(1) of the Criminal Act, which was amended and enforced by Act No. 13719 on January 6, 2016, shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for not more than five years or by a fine not exceeding 30 million won.

“A fine was added to statutory penalty by stipulating that the statutory penalty was “.”

The purport of the amendment is as follows: (a) the previous measure, which was to punish a minor coercion even though the form and motive of coercion are diverse, is deemed to be an anti-sexual measure taken from the fact that the previous measure had to be punished by imprisonment with prison labor, is excessive; (b) so, this constitutes “when a sentence is more severe than the previous one due to the amendment of a law after an offense” under Article 1(2) of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2016Do550, Mar. 10, 2016; 2016Do836, Mar. 24, 2016). Therefore, among the facts charged in the instant case, coercion by the Defendant to force the victim to perform an unobligatory act by threatening the victim pursuant to Article 1(2) of the Criminal Act, and can only be punished under Article 324(1) of the previous Criminal Act, a new corporation, and thus, Article 324 of the former Criminal Act cannot be applied.

On the other hand, the lower court is against this part of the facts charged.