However, this judgment has become final and conclusive against the Defendants.

Defendant

A is a spouse who has completed the marriage report with D on March 13, 1998, and Defendant B is a company member.

1. Defendant A:

A. At the end of January 18, 2009, in a room where the family room of the Mourel cannot be known that the name in the monthly dong of the Gwangju Mine-gu cannot be known, the first defendant B and the first sexual intercourse;

B. At around 19:00 on February 19, 2009, the FMoel 304 room in Gwangju Mine-gu E was sent to the upper defendant B one time with each other.

2. Defendant B knew that he was the spouse A, and even at the same time and place as the above, the above defendant B had sexual intercourse with the above defendant A twice in each phase.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Statement made to D by the police;

1. Requests for analysis of genes and requests for appraisal;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes governing evidence photographs;

1. Defendant A of the pertinent Article of the Criminal Act concerning the crime: The first sentence of Article 241(1) of the Criminal Act: the second sentence of Article 241(1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the ground that Article 62(1) of the Criminal Code of the Suspension of Execution (the defendant A does not have a previous conviction, the defendant B did not have a previous conviction except 700,000 won due to the violation of the Road Traffic Act, and all the defendants reflect their depth) (the number of days of detention: 2 days each