The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence of the lower court (a fine of one million won, an order to complete a sexual assault treatment program 40 hours, confiscation, etc.) against the accused against the summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court’s judgment on the assertion of unfair sentencing, and the sentencing of the first instance court is not beyond the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). In light of the foregoing legal doctrine, the following circumstances are favorable to the Defendant: (a) the Defendant was aware of each of the instant crimes; (b) the Defendant’s recognition of each of the instant crimes; and (c) the Defendant appears to suffer economic difficulties.

However, in full view of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant taken the body of another person over 52 occasions; (b) the likelihood of identification of face and the frequency of crimes, etc. that are disadvantageous to the Defendant; and (c) no new sentencing data was submitted in the first instance trial; and (d) there was no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the lower court; and (b) other circumstances, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive and background of crimes, means and consequence of the crimes; and (c) the circumstances after the crimes, etc., which form the conditions of sentencing as shown in the records and pleadings, such as the circumstances after the crimes, do not seem to be unreasonable since the lower court’s sentencing goes beyond

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.

B. Article 59-3 of the Act on Welfare of Persons with Disabilities, which was amended by Act No. 15904 on December 11, 2018 and enforced on June 12, 2019, on an ex officio decision on an order to restrict employment under the Act on Welfare of Persons with Disabilities, is a case where a court declares a sex crime (referring to a sex crime under Article 2(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes or a sex crime against a child or juvenile under Article 2(2) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse).