The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the lower court’s punishment (one year of imprisonment, 40 hours to complete a sexual assault treatment program, and 5 years of the employment restriction order issued by institutions related to children and juveniles) is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. There is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the original judgment as the new sentencing materials have not been submitted in the judgment of the original court. In full view of all the reasons for sentencing indicated in the records of this case, it cannot be deemed that the lower court’s sentencing was too unhued and exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

3. The prosecutor's appeal of conclusion is dismissed under Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit.

[However, pursuant to Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure, the part of the lower judgment’s employment restriction order in the application of the statutes shall be corrected to “the main sentence of Article 56(1) of the former Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (amended by Act No. 15452, Mar. 13, 2018 and enforced September 14, 2018).”