The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the lower court’s punishment (a fine of KRW 7 million, an order to complete a sexual assault treatment program of KRW 40 hours) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the various sentencing conditions indicated in the records and arguments of this case, including the following: (a) examining the judgment on the assertion of unfair sentencing, and the fact that there is no particular change in the sentencing conditions compared with the original judgment; and (b) considering the degree of the indecent act in this case and the Defendant’s previous conviction in 2017, the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable. Therefore, the Defendant’s assertion

B. Ex officio determination as to whether to issue an employment restriction order, and Article 59-3(1) of the Welfare of Disabled Persons Act, which was amended by Act No. 15904, Dec. 11, 2018, effective June 12, 2019, as well as Article 59-3(1) of the Act on Welfare of Disabled Persons, which was enforced as of June 12, 2019, provides that where a court declares a sex crime (referring to a sex crime defined in Article 2 (1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes or a sex crime subject to children and juveniles defined in subparagraph 2 of Article 2 of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse), it shall, by judgment, issue an order to operate welfare facilities for disabled persons, or to provide actual labor to welfare facilities for disabled persons (hereinafter referred to as “employment restriction order”), with an order to prohibit employment or actual labor (hereinafter referred to as “employment restriction order”), and where the risk of recidivism is remarkably low or any special reason to restrict employment, it shall not exceed an employment restriction order.