The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

가. 사실 오인 피고인은 이 사건 당시 피해자 D의 머리에 입맞춤하는 시늉만 하였을 뿐 피해자를 끌어안고 피해자의 이마에 입을 맞춘 사실이 없고, 피고인에게는 추 행의 고의도 없었다.

B. The sentence of the lower court (an amount of KRW 2,00,000) that is unfair in sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. We examine ex officio the defendant's argument of reasons for appeal prior to the determination of ex officio.

Article 56(1) and (2) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (amended by Act No. 15352, Jan. 16, 2018; Article 56(1) and (2) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (amended by Act No. 15352, Jul. 17, 2018; hereinafter referred to as “Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse”) which uniformly provides for the restriction on employment of children and juveniles-related institutions, etc. for ten years for sex offenses against children, juveniles, or adults; and where the court issues a sentence of punishment or treatment and custody for such sex offenses, it shall simultaneously issue an employment restriction order to prevent the operation of institutions, etc. related to children and juveniles, or the provision of employment or actual labor to institutions, etc. related to children and juveniles for a certain period not exceeding ten years, but there are special circumstances where the risk of recidivism is remarkably low, or otherwise it is prohibited to restrict employment.

In the judgment of the court, the employment restriction order may not be issued.

Therefore, Article 3 of the Addenda to the above Act provides that the amended provisions of Article 56 shall also apply to a person who had committed the above sex offense before the enforcement and has not received a final and conclusive judgment. Thus, the above amended Act shall also apply to this case. Therefore, the judgment of the court below shall no longer be maintained in this regard.

However, the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts is still subject to the judgment of this court, despite the above reasons for reversal of authority.

3...