2. The Defendants are not guilty.

A. The sentence of the court below against Defendant A is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B (as to the crime of mistake of facts as stated in the judgment of the court below) : Defendant B was unaware of the fact that Defendant A was a pro rata South.

【Unjustifiable sentencing: The sentence of the court below is too unreasonable.

2. On June 28, 200, Defendant A filed a marriage report with K on June 28, 200.

Defendant

A around 22:00 on December 3, 2013, around 22:2:00, the Defendant, as indicated in the list of crimes in the holding of the lower judgment, sent 13 times between around that time and around March 23, 2014.

B. Defendant B, despite being aware that he was a spouse A, had sexual intercourse with A at the same time and place as that set forth in the preceding paragraph.

3. We examine ex officio the Defendants’ grounds for appeal prior to the judgment.

On February 26, 2015, the Constitutional Court decided that Article 241 of the Criminal Act applied to the Defendants by the public prosecutor was unconstitutional, and Article 241 of the Criminal Act was retroactively invalidated.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is no longer maintained.

4. As such, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the grounds for appeal by the Defendants, on the ground that the above judgment of the court below is reversed ex officio, and it is again decided as follows.

The summary of the facts charged of this case is identical to Paragraph 2, and Paragraph 3, which constitutes a case that does not constitute a crime, and thus, all defendants are acquitted pursuant to the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.