The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to Chuncheon District Court Panel Division.

ex officio deemed.

Of the facts charged in the instant case, the lower court convicted him/her of applying Articles 3(1) and 2(1)1 of the former Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (amended by Act No. 7891, Mar. 24, 2006; Act No. 12896, Dec. 30, 2014; hereinafter the same) and Article 283(1) of the Criminal Act with regard to intimidation by carrying a deadly weapon.

However, after the judgment of the court below was rendered, the Constitutional Court rendered a decision of unconstitutionality on the part of Article 3(1) of the former Punishment of Violences, etc. Act relating to “a person who commits a crime under Articles 260(1), 283(1) and 366 of the Criminal Act by carrying a deadly weapon or other dangerous object” (the Constitutional Court Decision 2014Hun-Ba154, 398, 2015Hun-Ba3, 9, 215Hun-Ga14, 2015, 2015Hun-Ga18, 200, 200, 255Hun-Ga18, 200, and 25(combined)) of the former Punishment of Violences, etc. Act applied by the court below (the Constitutional Court Decision 2014Hun-Ba154, 398, Sept. 24, 2015).

In a case where the penal law or legal provision becomes retroactively null and void due to the decision of unconstitutionality, the facts charged charged by applying the pertinent provision are not a crime. Thus, the judgment of the court below convicting this part of the facts charged cannot be upheld any more.

Therefore, the part of the judgment of the court below on the violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act should be reversed. The first instance court maintained by the court below see that this part and the remaining criminal facts are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act and sentenced to a single punishment. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below shall

Therefore, without further proceeding to decide on the grounds of appeal, the lower judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded to the lower court for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.