The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The lower court’s punishment (a fine of 2 million won, and a sexual assault treatment program program 40 hours) against the Defendant on the grounds of appeal (unfair punishment) is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Comprehensively taking into account the arguments and records of the Prosecutor’s assertion, the lower court’s sentencing appears to have been reasonably determined by fully considering all the circumstances, including various sentencing grounds asserted by the Prosecutor, and there is no special circumstance to the extent of changing sentencing ex post facto. Accordingly, the Prosecutor’s assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.

B. According to Article 2 of the Addenda to the Welfare of Disabled Persons Act (amended by Act No. 15904, Dec. 11, 2018; Act No. 15904, Jun. 12, 2019), Article 59-3(1) of the Act on Welfare of Disabled Persons (amended by Act No. 15904, Jun. 12, 2019) applies to a person who has committed a sex offense before the enforcement of the Act, and has not received a final and conclusive judgment.

In light of the following: (a) the Defendant’s age, the risk of recidivism, family environment, social relationship, the details and motive of the crime, the method and consequence of the crime; (b) the degree and expected side effects of the Defendant’s disadvantage due to the employment restriction order; (c) the prevention and effect of the sex offense that may be achieved therefrom; and (d) the effect of the protection of victims, etc., there are special circumstances where the employment restriction order for welfare facilities for the disabled should not be imposed; (b) the lower court did not issue an employment restriction order for welfare facilities for the disabled pursuant to the proviso of

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is without merit, and it is in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.