(영문) 대법원 2016.4.15.선고 2016도1167 판결

Article 2 Section 1 of the former Punishment of Violences Act (amended by Act No. 13718; hereinafter referred to as the "former Punishment of Violences Act").

The judgment of the court of first instance which convicted the defendant by applying subparagraph 3 of this paragraph and Article 350 (1) of the Criminal Act.

was maintained as above.

2. A person who habitually commits any of the following crimes under Article 2 (1) of the former Punishment of Violences Act:

The following shall be punished in accordance with the following classification: (a) violent offenses prescribed by the Criminal Code in each of the following subparagraphs:

B listed in B and the corresponding statutory penalty was stipulated, but the amendment was made by Act No. 13718 on January 6, 2016

Article 2 (1) of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act that has been enacted and enforced shall delete Article 2 (1) for each transitional provision.

It did not have a road.

In such a case, there was a provision on aggravated elements for violent crimes under the Criminal Code.

The purpose of deletion of Article 2 (1) of the Punishment of Violences Act is the same as the aggravated constituent elements.

General risk of suffering from an act of violence consisting of the crimes listed in each subparagraph of this paragraph.

Even if considered, the circumstances leading to the individual crime, the specific attitude of the act, and the degree of infringement of legal interests are very important.

On the other hand, it is unfair to punish the previous measure that is to be punished uniformly.

It should be viewed as sexual action.

Therefore, this crime is committed by the amendment of the law after the crime under Article 1 (2) of the Criminal Code.

Since a sentence does not constitute or is less than that of the old law, it constitutes a new law in accordance with the above provision.

must be used (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Do16560, Feb. 18, 2016).

Thus, the facts charged of this case is the punishment of violence committed by the Gu, a corporation in the event of an act under Article 1(2) of the

Since the provision of the law cannot be applied, the judgment of the court below is no longer able to maintain it.

3. Therefore, without examining the grounds of appeal, we reverse the judgment below and the case is remanded again.

The case is remanded to the lower court for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion. It is so decided by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

shall be determined as above.