However, each of the above punishments shall be executed for one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Defendant A is a person who is a spouse who has completed a marriage report with D on August 14, 2002.

On January 12, 2012, from around 15:00 to 17:56, the Defendant used the Fururel 601 room in Gwangju Mine-gu to connect B with each other.

2. Defendant B knew that he was a spouse of the above A, and even at the same time and place as the above 1. Paragraph (1) above, the Defendant had sexual intercourse with A once.

Summary of Evidence

1. The defendant's legal statement;

1. Protocol concerning the interrogation of the Defendants by the prosecution (part)

1. Statement of D police statement;

1. Photographs;

1. Application of the statutes on response to requests for appraisal;

1. Article 241 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

1. Judgment on the assertion by the Defendants and the defense counsel under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Code of the Suspension of Execution

1. Since the complainant D has reached an obvious agreement with the two parties to divorce by filing a counterclaim against a lawsuit seeking divorce, etc. by Defendant A, etc., the complainant constitutes the case where Defendant A’s adultery is used. Therefore, the prosecution against the Defendants should be dismissed since the complaint is not effective.

2. Where the judgment party has no intention to continue a matrimonial relationship and there exists a mutual agreement with the intention of divorce, even if the marital relationship remains legally, the declaration of intention corresponding to the end, which is the prior consent to the adultery, shall be deemed to be included in the agreement. However, in the absence of such agreement, even if the intention of divorce is expressed by both parties on a provisional and interim basis, it does not fall under the case of inter-livering treatment (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2000Do868, Jul. 7, 2000). According to the evidence duly adopted and investigated by this court, Defendant A filed a lawsuit seeking the payment of consolation money and consolation money against D on November 22, 201, and the complainant filed the lawsuit against the above Defendant on December 19, 201.