The judgment of the court below is reversed.

As to the crime No. 2 and No. 3 of the judgment, the defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for 10 months.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the imprisonment of 10 months with prison labor for the crime No. 1, the second and third crimes as stated in the judgment of the court below) is too unreasonable because the information disclosure and notification for three years, the order to submit sexual assault treatment programs for 40 hours, the employment restriction three years) of imprisonment with prison labor is too unreasonable.

2. Article 59-3(1) of the Act on Welfare of Persons with Disabilities (Act No. 15904) (amended by Act No. 15904), effective as of June 12, 2019, provides that where the court issues a sentence of imprisonment or medical treatment and custody for sex offense, the court shall, by judgment, order the operation of welfare facilities for persons with disabilities or the provision of actual labor to persons with disabilities for a certain period from the date on which the execution of the sentence or medical treatment and custody is terminated, suspended or exempted (where a fine is sentenced, the date on which the sentence becomes final and conclusive) or the execution thereof is suspended or exempted (hereinafter referred to as “order to restrict employment”) to be sentenced simultaneously with a judgment on a sex offense case, and the proviso to Article 59-3(1)

In addition, Article 2 of the Addenda to Act on Welfare of Persons with Disabilities (Act No. 15904, Dec. 11, 2018) provides that Article 59-3(1) of the Act on Welfare of Persons with Disabilities shall also apply to a person who has committed a sex offense before the enforcement of the Act and has not been finally determined.

The offense of violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (obscenity using communications media) constitutes a sex offense to which Article 59-3(1) of the same Act applies, and thus, the court shall decide whether to issue or exempt an employment restriction order to the accused.

Considering the method and attitude of the crime appearing in the records of this case, the relationship between the defendant and the victim, and the circumstances before and after the crime, there is no special circumstance that the defendant would not significantly lower the risk of recidivism or restrict employment.