The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. The lower court’s assertion of the violation of the principle of prohibition of disadvantageous alteration is that the lower court rendered a judgment on September 17, 2019, which was subsequent to the enforcement of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (hereinafter “Revised Act”) as amended by Act No. 15352 on January 16, 2018 and the Act on Welfare of Disabled Persons (hereinafter “Revised Act”) amended by Act No. 15904 on December 11, 2018, and rendered a judgment on September 17, 2019, Article 3 of the Addenda to the amended Act on the Protection of Juveniles from Sexual Abuse, Article 56(1) of the amended Act, Article 2 of the Addenda to the amended Act on the Welfare of Disabled Persons, Article 59-3(1) of the amended Act, and Article 59-3(1) of the Addenda

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2018Do13367, Oct. 25, 2018). Therefore, we cannot accept the allegation in the grounds of appeal that the lower judgment erred by violating the principle of prohibition of disadvantageous alteration.

2. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the intent of indecent act

3. The Defendant’s final appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.