[형실효선고·각하결정에대한재항고][집31(2)형,40;공1983.6.1.(705),841]
A. The meaning of “a sentence loses its effect” under Article 65 of the Criminal Act
(b) If the period of suspension of execution has elapsed after a judgment of suspension of execution was rendered within seven years after the completion of the execution of sentence, the sentence of suspension of execution of sentence;
A. Under Article 65 of the Criminal Code, the phrase “a sentence loses its effect” is merely that the legal effect of the sentence ceases to exist, and it does not mean that the fact that the sentence had been pronounced has no effect.
(b) Even if seven years have elapsed since a suspended sentence was rendered within seven years after the completion of the execution of the sentence and the period of the suspended sentence was terminated without prison labor, the sentence may not be declared invalidated because it does not constitute “seven years have elapsed without prison labor” as prescribed in Article 81 of the Criminal Act.
(a) Article 65 of the Criminal Act;
Re-appellant
Gwangju District Court Order 82Ra1 dated February 8, 1983
The reappeal is dismissed.
The grounds of reappeal are examined.
According to the judgment of the court below, the re-appellant was sentenced to the defendant case of violation of the Act on defamation and Martial Law again within seven years after completion of the execution of the final sentence, and it was obvious that he was sentenced to the defendant case of violation of the Act on defamation and Martial Law again within seven years after completion of the execution of the final sentence of the defendant case of violation of the Act on Martial Law, and the defendant case of defamation and the violation of the Act on Martial Law became final and conclusive by the judgment of the Supreme Court of July 8, 1975, and the sentence of three months of imprisonment for each case of defamation and violation of the Act on Martial Law was terminated on July 8, 1975, and again the judgment of the court below was rendered at the Gwangju District Court of Gwangju for one year as a final and conclusive judgment of July 10, 1981.
When the period of probation has elapsed without the invalidation or cancellation of the sentence after being sentenced to the probation under Article 65 of the Criminal Act, the sentence that loses its effect is no longer effective, and it does not mean that the fact that the sentence had been sentenced is no longer invalid. Thus, the arguments that the sentence itself loses its effect after the lapse of the period of probation under the former sentence, and that the seven-year period under Article 81 of the Criminal Act has elapsed since it loses its effect, cannot be employed, cannot be employed, unless it is a separate opinion.
Therefore, the reappeal is dismissed, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.
Justices Lee Il-young (Presiding Justice)