The judgment below

The part of the case of the defendant is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

The defendant shall be 40 hours.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant and the person subject to a request for attachment order (hereinafter “Defendant”) did not engage in indecent acts, such as indecent acts as stated in the facts charged, against the victim E (hereinafter “victim”). 2) The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor 1) The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant is too uneasible and unreasonable. 2) Although the Defendant’s rejection of the request for an attachment order is likely to repeat an offense, the lower court dismissed the request for an attachment order based on its judgment.

2. Ex officio determination

A. The lower court related to the statement of the request for explanation, etc., which had gone through the procedures of hearing of the professional examiner ex officio outside the court, but the prosecutor did not invoke as evidence the “written request for explanation, etc.,” which is the reply of the professional examiner regarding the above procedure, or did not present any special opinion thereon. The Defendant’s defense counsel submitted the above written request for explanation, etc. as evidence No. 2 on the third trial date of the lower court.

However, when the opinion or explanation of the professional examiner is used as the basis of conviction, it is necessary to apply to the party concerned and to investigate evidence according to the strict method. Since the written opinion of the professional examiner is hearsay evidence under Article 313 of the Criminal Procedure Act, it is necessary to keep the admissibility of evidence

In particular, the defendant or defense counsel is supporting the guilt among the documentary evidence submitted by the defendant or defense counsel as evidence of innocence.

Even without the other party's consent, the court may not use the documentary evidence as evidence of conviction unless it investigates the authenticity of the document and gives the defendant or his/her defense counsel an opportunity to present his/her opinion and defend himself/herself.

Nevertheless, the court below made a request for the above explanation, which only the defense counsel submitted as evidence.