The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant

A Imprisonment with prison labor for a maximum of five years, for a short of three years, for defendant B, for a long of six years and for a short of six years.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (for defendant A, 5 years of imprisonment with prison labor for a maximum of 5 years, 3 years of short term, 6 years of imprisonment for a maximum of 6 years, 4 years of short term) declared by the court below is too unreasonable.

2. Article 59-3(1) of the Act on Welfare of Persons with Disabilities (amended by Act No. 15904, Dec. 11, 2018) stipulates that persons who were sentenced to punishment for sexual crimes under Article 2(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes or sexual crimes against children and juveniles under Article 2 subparag. 2 of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (hereinafter “sexual crimes”) have uniformly provided for the restriction on employment of persons with disabilities for the ten-year period.

However, Article 59-3(1) and (2) of the Act on Welfare of Persons with Disabilities, which was amended by Act No. 15904, Dec. 11, 2018 and enforced from Jun. 12, 2019, provides that where the court issues a sentence of imprisonment or medical treatment and custody for a sex offense, it shall not issue an employment restriction order to operate welfare facilities for a specific period not exceeding 10 years or provide employment or actual labor to welfare facilities for the disabled, but shall not issue an employment restriction order in the event of a sex offense case.

Article 2 of the Addenda to the above amended Act provides that the amended provisions of Article 59-3 shall also apply to a person who has committed a sex offense before the enforcement and has not received a final and conclusive judgment, and the above amended Act shall also apply to this case.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below that did not issue an employment restriction order or decide whether to exempt the Defendants from employment under the Act on Welfare of Persons with Disabilities is no longer able to maintain.

3. Accordingly, the court below's decision on the ground of an ex officio reversal is based on Article 364 (2) and (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendants' assertion of unfair sentencing.