The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

However, for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence of imprisonment (one year of imprisonment) imposed by the court below on the defendant is too unreasonable.

B. It is improper for the lower court to order the Defendant to disclose personal information.

2. Determination

A. As to the allegation of unfair sentencing, the instant crime is difficult to view that the Defendant’s indecent act by force on the part of the victim who was a juvenile who was not a single-passed juvenile by inducing the Defendant to buy a boomed juvenile, and thus, committed an indecent act on the part of the victim during the restaurant.

However, it is reasonable to take into account the fact that the defendant led to the confession of the crime of this case in depth, that the defendant was living in an unsound environment, such as the fact that the defendant was living together with the victim, that the defendant was living in a bad environment, and that the defendant did not have any criminal record against the defendant, that the defendant was fully agreed with the victim, that the defendant was physically disabled, that the defendant was physically disabled, and that he was living together with his mother.

In addition, the above circumstances and other conditions of sentencing such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, and circumstances after the crime, etc. revealed in the arguments of this case, and the scope of recommended sentences according to the sentencing guidelines established by the Supreme Court Sentencing [the scope of recommending punishment] general standard of indecent acts by force (subject to the age of 13) and the scope of mitigation (1-2 years and year): Juvenile indecent acts by force (including indecent acts by force, such as indecent act by force, and by force, etc. by force and by force): The minimum sentence and upper limit of the sentence are reduced to 2/3 (special mitigation) and the standards of suspended sentence are considered, so it is unreasonable for the court below to determine that the punishment of the court below is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's ground of appeal on this part is with merit.

B. As to the wrongful assertion of an order to disclose personal information, personal information is stipulated as one of the grounds for exception to an order to disclose or notify information under the proviso of Article 49(1) and the proviso of Article 50(1) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse.