The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years and six months.

For a period of four years, disclosed information on the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Under the influence of the Defendant at the time of committing the crime, the Defendant was in a state of mental disability.

B. In light of the fact that the Defendant, while under the influence of alcohol, committed the instant crime by contingency, the degree of injury, the Defendant’s home environment, and the Defendant’s age, etc., the lower court’s punishment (two years and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The lower court, ex officio, found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged, applied Article 16(2) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes, and completed the sexual assault treatment program for 40 hours.

However, Article 16 of the former Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (amended by Act No. 10567, Apr. 7, 2011; hereinafter the same) that applies to the crime of rape and injury in the judgment of the court below only stipulates that probation may be ordered, or community service or order participation may be ordered, only when the execution of a sentence is suspended for a person who commits a sexual crime, and the system that allows a person who commits a sexual crime to be issued an order to attend a lecture or order to complete a sexual crime treatment program concurrently was introduced when the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes was amended

In addition, the Addenda to the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes ( April 7, 201) provides that "The amended provisions of Article 16 shall apply to persons who first commit sexual crimes after this Act enters into force, on the date six months have elapsed since the date of its promulgation ( October 8, 2011) in paragraph (1)."

Therefore, even though the above Act does not apply to the defendant who committed the crime of this case on October 19, 2010, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles that the court below imposed imprisonment for two and a half years to the defendant and completed the sexual assault program.