The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. There are special circumstances in which disclosure or notification of personal information may not be disclosed or notified" provided for in the proviso to Articles 49(1) and 50(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes against Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse, which are applicable pursuant to Articles 47(1) and 49(1) of the Act on the Protection of Juveniles against Sexual Abuse;

The issue of whether a case constitutes “a case to be determined” shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account the Defendant’s age, occupation, risk of repeating a crime, characteristics of the offender, such as the type, motive, process, consequence, seriousness of the crime, etc. of the crime, the degree of disadvantage and anticipated side effects of the Defendant’s entrance due to the disclosure order or notification order, the preventive effects and effects of the sexual crime subject to registration that may be achieved therefrom, and the effects of the protection of the victims from the sexual crime subject to registration (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Do163, Feb. 23, 2012). 2. The lower court held that there are special circumstances under which the disclosure of the Defendant’s personal information may not be made, taking into account the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, social relationship, the background and consequence of the crime of this case, the degree and anticipated side effects of the Defendant’s entry, the prevention of sexual crimes that may be achieved therefrom, and the effects of the protection of the victim, etc.

Considering that it is impossible to do so, the defendant issued a disclosure order and notification order for three years.

In light of the aforementioned legal principles and records, such measures by the court below are just, and contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, the court below did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal principles on the order to disclose

3. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.