The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

Sexual assault, 40 hours against the defendant.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that the lower court’s punishment (three years of imprisonment, 40 hours of order to complete a sexual assault treatment program, 2 years of employment restriction order) is too unreasonable.

2. Article 45(2) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes with Ex officio Judgment provides that where a sex crime which causes the registration of personal information and other crimes are concurrent pursuant to the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act and a sentence is pronounced pursuant to Article 38 of the Criminal Act, all of the sentence shall be deemed a sentence for a sex crime which causes the registration of personal information, and where a court deems that the period of registration is unreasonable due to the application of paragraph (2) and the application of paragraph (4) of the same Article, it may determine the short-term period of registration as the period of registration.

However, the lower court, in relation to the concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, found the Defendant guilty of the charges of attempted quasi-indecent acts subject to the registration of personal information and the charges of fraud that do not correspond to such charges, and sentenced the Defendant to a single imprisonment, but did not deliberate and decide on whether the period of registration of personal information is unreasonable, and thus, cannot avoid reversal of the lower judgment.

Meanwhile, pursuant to Article 45(4) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Sexual Crimes, the part of the judgment setting the short term period as the registration period is an incidental disposition simultaneously with a conviction of a sex offense case subject to registration, and the judgment of the court below shall be reversed in its entirety, even if there is no error

3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, on the ground that the above reasons for reversal of authority as above exist, and it is again decided as follows.

[Grounds for the judgment]