The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles (as to the forced indecent act among the judgment below, the Defendant’s act of indecent act was committed on one occasion by misunderstanding the victim’s right shoulder and part, etc., but this cannot be viewed as an indecent act in light of the place at that time, response to the victim’s driving, etc.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (the amounting to KRW 3,00,00,000, and the completion of sexual assault treatment programs) 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 mistake and mistake of facts on the ground of the above ex officio reversal.