logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.06.19 2015재고단30
간통
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. The summary of the facts charged A is a spouse who has completed marriage reporting with F around March 30, 1989.

At around 20:00 on the first day of August 2010, the Defendant taught A and once with the Defendant in a guest room with H hotel number No. G located in Songpa-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government.

B. At around 19:30 on October 25, 2010, the Defendant provided a single sexual intercourse with A at a guest room with the J hotel number I located in the Young-si Suwon-si Si 19:30.

C. On March 8, 2011, around 19:30 on March 8, 201, the Defendant attended A and once in a guest room with the J hotel number under the above sub-paragraph (b).

At around 20:00 on March 23, 201, the Defendant provided a single sexual intercourse with A at the number room located in Seongbuk-gu, Seongbuk-gu, Sungnam-gu, Sungnam-si.

The defendant knew that he was a spouse of the above A, and had sexual intercourse with A and four times at the same time and place.

2. Determination

A. The prosecutor, applying Article 241(1) of the Criminal Act to the facts charged in the instant case, brought a public prosecution by applying Article 241(1) of the Criminal Act, and was sentenced to a judgment subject to a retrial that found him guilty, and became final and conclusive

B. On February 26, 2015, the Constitutional Court rendered on February 26, 2015, after the judgment subject to review became final and conclusive.

[The Constitutional Court Decision 209Hun-Ba17,205, 2010Hun-Ba194, 2011Hun-Ba4, 2012Hun-Ba4, 2012Hun-Ba5, 255, 411, 2013Hun-Ba139, 161, 267, 276, 342, 365, 2014Hun-Ba53, 464, 201Hun-Ba31, 2011Hun-Ba31, 2014Hun-Ga4, 2014Hun-Ga4, which was decided as unconstitutional on February 26, 2015 [Article 47(3) of the Constitutional Court Act] Where a previous case is decided as unconstitutional, the Constitutional Court rendered a decision that the above provision does not violate the Constitution on October 30, 2008 (Article 207Hun-Ba17).

C. In a case where the provisions of the penal law retroactively lose its effect due to the decision of unconstitutionality, the defendant's case which was prosecuted by applying the pertinent provisions is not a crime.

arrow