From March 16, 2012, the Defendant knew that he/she was a spouse of the above A, followed up to 21:0 on March 16, 2012, the F Building 103 of Jindo-gun, Jindo-gun, Jindo-gun, with a single sexual intercourse.

2. The prosecutor charged a public prosecution by applying the latter part of Article 241(1) of the Criminal Act to the facts charged, and the judgment that found him/her guilty (Supreme Court Decision 2012No238 Decided July 17, 2013) became final and conclusive on February 6, 2014.

On February 26, 2015, the Constitutional Court declared that Article 241 of the Criminal Act, which is the applicable provisions of the charges in this case, is unconstitutional.

(The Constitutional Court Order 2009Hun-Ba17, Feb. 26, 2015). Following the above decision of unconstitutionality, Article 241 of the Criminal Act was invalidated retroactively on October 31, 2008, following the date on which the previous decision of constitutionality was made in accordance with the proviso of Article 47(3) of the Constitutional Court Act, and the Constitutional Court’s decision of unconstitutionality, where the law or legal provision on punishment retroactively loses its validity, the case that was prosecuted by applying the relevant provision of the Act is not a crime.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Do9949, May 13, 2011). If so, the facts charged in this case constitute a case that does not constitute a crime, and thus, the Defendant is acquitted pursuant to the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.