The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

The defendant's child abuse for 80 hours.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal: The lower court’s imprisonment (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The main text of Article 29-3(1) of the Child Welfare Act (amended by Act No. 15889, Dec. 11, 2018; hereinafter “Amended Child Welfare Act”) which was amended on June 12, 2019; and enforced on June 12, 2019 (hereinafter “the Child Welfare Act”) provides that where a court declares a punishment for a child abuse-related crime, it shall simultaneously issue an employment restriction order that prohibits a child-related institution from operating or providing employment or actual labor to a child-related institution for a certain period not exceeding 10 years, but shall not issue an employment restriction order in cases where the risk of recidivism is remarkably low, or where it is deemed that there are special circumstances that need not restrict employment.

In addition, Article 2 (1) of the Addenda to the amended Child Welfare Act provides that the above amendment provision of Article 29-3 provides that a person who has committed a crime related to child abuse and has not received a final and conclusive judgment prior to the enforcement of the amended Child Welfare Act shall also apply.

As such, Article 29-3 of the amended Child Welfare Act applies to this case after the decision of the court below was made, it is necessary to examine whether the defendant who committed child abuse prior to the enforcement of the amended Child Welfare Act was sentenced to the employment restriction order and the period of employment restriction.

However, the employment restriction order is an incidental disposition that is sentenced simultaneously with the conviction of a child abuse crime case, and the judgment of the court below should be reversed in whole, even if there is no error in the conviction part of the judgment below.

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, and it is again decided as follows through pleading.