The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The abstract of grounds for appeal (mental disorder and unreasonable sentencing);

A. At the time of committing the crime, the Defendant was in a state of mental disability or mental health disorder.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (a fine of three million won and an order to complete a sexual assault treatment program of 40 hours) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of mental disorder, the defendant was found to have a drinking condition at the time of the crime in this case. However, in light of the background, means, methods, and the defendant's behavior before and after the crime in this case, it cannot be deemed that the defendant did not have the ability to discern things or make decisions due to drinking at the time of the crime in this case.

The defendant's mental disorder is without merit.

B. The Defendant recognized the facts charged and opposed to the wrong determination on the assertion of unfair sentencing.

However, the crime of this case is an indecent act committed by the defendant against the victim by deceiving the victim with less than the victim, and by spreading the water to the victim under paragraph (1), and it is not good that the crime is committed in light of the circumstances, methods and circumstances.

The defendant was unable to receive a letter from the victim.

The defendant has been punished for violent crimes.

In addition, comprehensively taking into account the following circumstances, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, motive and background of the offense, and circumstances after the offense, etc., the sentencing of the lower court cannot be deemed as being excessively unreasonable because it goes beyond the reasonable discretion.

The defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.

3. According to Article 3 of the Addenda to the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (amended by Act No. 15352, Jan. 16, 2018), a child or juvenile under Article 56 of the said Act, which was effective July 17, 2018, is exempted from an employment restriction order (ex officio determination).