All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The judgment of the court below that exempted the defendant from disclosure and notification order despite the risk of recidivism and recidivism of sexual crime against the defendant is unfair.

B. The sentencing of the lower court (five years of imprisonment) is too heavy or unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the prosecutor’s improper assertion of exemption from disclosure and notification order, Articles 47(1) and 49(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes, and Articles 49(1) and 50(1) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse, there are special circumstances in which the personal information of a sex offender should, in principle, be disclosed and notified to the public, be exceptionally prohibited.

rule that exemption shall be granted if it is determined.

There is a special reason not to disclose or notify personal information.

In determining whether a case constitutes “a crime” ought to be determined by comprehensively taking into account the Defendant’s age, occupation, risk of recidivism, characteristics of the relevant crime, such as the type, motive, process, consequence, seriousness of the relevant crime, etc., the degree of disadvantage and anticipated side effects of the Defendant’s entrance due to an disclosure order or notification order, the preventive effect and effect of the sexual crime subject to registration that may be achieved therefrom, and the effect of protecting the victims from the sexual crime subject to registration, etc. (see Supreme Court Decision 2011Do163, Feb. 23, 2012). 2) The following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, namely, the Defendant’s perception of the crime, contradicts the wrong act, and does not repeat the same crime. In light of the relationship between the Defendant and the victim, and the motive, circumstance, etc. of the crime, the mere fact that a sexual traffic intermediary act has been committed against many and unspecified persons is committed against the Defendant.