The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

Provided, That the above punishment shall be imposed for four years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is unreasonable that the sentence of the original court (two years of imprisonment and six months of suspension of execution, etc.) is too unhued;

2. Judgment on the grounds for appeal ex officio shall be made ex officio prior to the judgment.

Article 29-3(1) of the former Child Welfare Act (amended by the following) also constitutes an indecent act committed by a protector of a child abuse-related crime under his/her protection.

(A) Article 3 subparag. 7-2 (a) of the Child Welfare Act and Article 2 subparag. 4 (m) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Child Abuse Crimes (i.e., Article 2 subparag. 4 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Child Abuse Crimes). The term “within 10 years after the execution of punishment or medical treatment and custody in whole or in part is terminated or non-execution becomes final and conclusive from the time when it becomes final and conclusive to prevent a child-related institution from operating or providing employment

However, unlike the previous provisions, Article 29-3(1) of the Child Welfare Act, which was amended by Act No. 1589, Dec. 11, 2018, effective June 12, 2019 (hereafter “Revised Child Welfare Act” in this paragraph), where a court declares a punishment or a medical treatment and custody for committing a child abuse-related crime, it shall, by a judgment, issue an order not to operate a child-related institution or to provide employment or actual labor to a child-related institution for a certain period (hereinafter “employment restriction period”) from the date when the execution of such punishment or medical treatment and custody is terminated or suspended or exempted (hereinafter “employment restriction order”), and simultaneously issue an order not to issue an employment restriction order if it considers that the risk of recidivism is significantly low or that there is any special reason not to restrict employment, and Article 29-3(2) of the same Act provides that no employment restriction order may be issued.