The judgment below

We reverse the guilty part of the defendant's case.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

except that this judgment.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant case 1) According to the misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles and the evidence submitted by the Prosecutor, the Defendant and the respondent for attachment order (hereinafter “Defendant”).

A) Recognizing that the victim was unable to resist due to mental illness or having difficulty in resisting, it is sufficiently recognized that he committed an indecent act, etc. by using it. Nevertheless, the lower court acquitted this part of the facts charged, and there is an error of misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles. 2) The lower court’s sentence of unfair sentencing (2 years of suspended execution in October and 80 hours of sexual assault therapy, etc.) is too uneasible and unfair.

B. It is unreasonable for the court below to dismiss the defendant's request for an attachment order against the defendant even if the defendant's request for an attachment order is sufficiently recognized to pose a risk of

2. Part of the defendant's case

A. We examine ex officio prior to determining the prosecutor’s assertion of ex officio judgment.

Article 56 (1) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse, which was uniformly amended by Act No. 15352, Jan. 16, 2018; Article 56 (1) and (2) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse, which provides for the restriction on employment for persons sentenced to punishment for sex offenses against children, juveniles, or adults for a ten-year period; and Article 3 of the Addenda to the above amended Act provides that "the amended provisions of Article 56 shall apply to persons who have committed sex offenses before July 17, 2018 and have not been finally determined," and the above amended Act shall also apply to this case, so the judgment of the court below shall no longer be maintained.

However, the prosecutor's mistake or misapprehension of the legal principle despite the above reasons for reversal.