All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

The defendant's 40-hour child abuse.

1. The respective punishment (one year of imprisonment and four months of imprisonment) of the first and second original judgment against the accused in the summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable.

2. Ex officio determination

A. The Defendant appealed both of the lower judgment and this Court decided to hold a joint hearing of the two appeals cases. Since each of the offenses of the lower judgment is a concurrent offense under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act and a single sentence should be pronounced pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act, the lower judgment cannot be maintained in this respect.

B. In addition, the main text of Article 29-3(1) of the Child Welfare Act (amended by Act No. 1589, Dec. 11, 2018; effective June 12, 2019) provides that where a court declares a punishment for a child abuse-related crime, it shall impose an order to operate a child-related institution or not to provide employment or actual labor to a child-related institution for a certain period (hereinafter “employment restriction order”) simultaneously with the judgment of a child abuse-related crime case, and the proviso of the said provision provides that the same shall not apply to cases where the risk of recidivism is remarkably low, or where the employment is determined to be restricted, and the employment restriction period shall not exceed ten years.

In addition, according to Article 2 (1) of the Addenda to the Child Welfare Act (Act No. 15889, Dec. 11, 2018), the amended provisions of Article 29-3 apply to those who committed a child abuse-related crime before this Act enters into force and did not receive a final and conclusive judgment.

Therefore, if a sentence is imposed for a crime of violating the Child Welfare Act (child abuse) in this case, it is necessary to examine and judge whether the employment restriction period should be imposed simultaneously with the judgment on the restriction of employment pursuant to Article 29-3(1) of the Child Welfare Act.

The judgment on the employment restriction order under Article 29-3 (1) of the Child Welfare Act is a child abuse-related crime.