The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The punishment of the accused shall be determined by a year of imprisonment.

Sexual assault, 40 hours against the defendant.

The summary of the grounds for appeal is unfair because the punishment sentenced by the court below (one year and three months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

According to Article 59-3 of the Act on Welfare of Persons with Disabilities (Act No. 15904), which was amended on December 11, 2018 and enforced on June 12, 2019 (Act No. 15904), where a person is sentenced to a sexual crime under Article 2(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes or a sex offense against a child or juvenile under subparagraph 2 of Article 2 of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse, an employment restriction order may be issued within the extent not exceeding 10 years against welfare facilities; however, an employment restriction order may not be issued in cases where the risk of recidivism is remarkably low or where there are special circumstances that prevent employment from

Before the amendment, the relevant provisions of the Act stipulate that employment shall be restricted automatically for 10 years without the issuance of a separate employment restriction order.

In addition, according to Article 2 of the Addenda to the Welfare of Persons with Disabilities Act (Act No. 15904, Dec. 11, 2018), the above amended provisions shall also apply to persons who committed sex offenses before the enforcement and did not receive a final and conclusive judgment.

Each of the facts charged in the instant case constitutes a sex offense as seen earlier and thus, it is necessary to deliberate and decide whether to issue an employment restriction order with a period fixed in accordance with the above amended provisions, and thus, the lower judgment cannot be maintained as it is.

On the other hand, the facts charged in the instant case were committed by the Defendant on February 2, 2013 by inserting the sexual organ inside the body of the victim, who is a child or juvenile, to the first police officer.

As to this, the lower court applied Article 7(6), (4), and (2)1 of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse, and Article 299 of the Criminal Act, which was wholly amended by Act No. 11572, Dec. 18, 2012 and enforced from June 18, 2013.

However, the charged facts of this case committed prior to the enforcement of the amended Act.