[1] The meaning of "the day on which a criminal suspect becomes aware of the fact" under Article 230 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, which provides for the period of filing a complaint against a victim

[2] The case affirming the judgment below that in a divorce lawsuit filed against the husband who is the defendant, where the father of the child was aware of the fact of childbirth, pregnancy period, and the father of the fetus's father, the above adultery should be calculated for six months from that time on the ground that it is reasonable to see that the father of the child was aware of such fact

[1] Article 230 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act / [2] Article 241 of the Criminal Act, Article 230 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

[1] Supreme Court Decision 99Do576 delivered on April 23, 199 (Gong1999Sang, 1098) Supreme Court Decision 2001Do3106 delivered on October 9, 2001 (Gong2001Ha, 2496)

Defendant

Defendant

Busan High Court Decision 2010No70 decided March 31, 2010

The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

The main text of Article 230(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that "no complaint shall be filed after the lapse of six months from the date on which a person becomes aware of a crime subject to victim's complaint". The phrase "cognent of a criminal in this context means, from the ordinary point of view, that the person having authority to file a complaint knows the criminal facts and the criminal facts to the extent that the person having authority to file a complaint can file a complaint, and that the person having authority to file a complaint knows the criminal facts has a conclusive perception of the facts that there was a damage to a crime subject to victim's complaint (see Supreme Court Decision 201Do310

Examining the reasoning of the judgment below and the evidence duly adopted by the court below in light of the above legal principles, the court below is justified in rejecting the defendant's assertion that the complaint of this case was filed after the lapse of the period of filing a complaint as to the crime of adultery, based

The court below did not err in the misapprehension of legal principle as alleged in the grounds of appeal.

In addition, under Article 383 subparag. 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment or imprisonment without prison labor for more than ten years is imposed. Thus, in this case where a more minor sentence is imposed on the part of violation of the Certified Public Accountant Act, the argument that the determination of punishment is unfair is not legitimate

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Yang Chang-soo (Presiding Justice)