A. Defendant A is a spouse who has completed a marriage report with E on January 3, 2001.

1) On August 17, 2007, the Defendant, at around 05:46, 05:46, entered the F apartment B with B at the house of Denden City F apartment B.

2) On August 18, 2007, the Defendant conspiredd with B one time with B at the same place as in the foregoing paragraph at around 02:37.

In this respect, the defendant was sent to B over two occasions.

B. Defendant B knew that he was a spouse, and even at the time and place indicated in the above paragraph (a), the Defendant conspiredd with A twice with each other, as seen above.

2. Article 241 of the Criminal Act, which is a legal provision applicable to the facts charged in the instant case, was decided as unconstitutional according to the decision of the Constitutional Court on February 26, 2015 by the full bench, including the 2009HunBa17, etc.

As a result, Article 241 of the Criminal Code retroactively lost its effect on October 31, 2008, following the date of the previous constitutional decision (the Constitutional Court Decision 2007Hun-Ga decided on October 30, 2008) in accordance with the proviso of Article 47(3) of the Constitutional Court Act, pursuant to the proviso of Article 47(3) of the Constitutional Court Act.

Meanwhile, as in the instant case, insofar as Article 241 of the former Criminal Act, which had been effective at the time of the commission of the crime, became null and void retroactively from the day following the date of the final decision of constitutionality ( October 31, 2008) pursuant to the above 2009Hun-Ba 17, etc., and the proviso of Article 47(3) of the Constitutional Court Act, which was after the date of the crime, pursuant to the proviso of Article 47(3) of the Constitutional Court Act, becomes null and void, it shall be deemed that the case constitutes “when a sentence is repealed due to the repeal or repeal of the statutes after the

Therefore, the Defendants are acquitted in accordance with Article 326 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.