The judgment below

The remainder, excluding the rejection of an application for compensation order, shall be reversed.

The defendant shall be sentenced to one year of imprisonment.

1. The following facts are acknowledged according to the progress records of the case.

Defendant

On November 14, 2014, the applicant for new trial (hereinafter “Defendant”) was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for a maximum of two years and for a short of one year and six months for a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, fraud, and a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, and for a short term of one year and six months, and appealed on February 5, 2015 (hereinafter “instant judgment subject to new trial”) and was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for a period of one year and six months (hereinafter “instant judgment subject to new trial”), and the said judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

On February 26, 2015, the Constitutional Court rendered a decision that Article 329 of the Criminal Act and the attempted portion thereof in Article 5-4 (1) of the former Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (amended by Act No. 13717, Jan. 6, 2016; hereinafter “former Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Specific Crimes”) shall be in violation of the Constitution (see Constitutional Court Decision 2014Hun-Ga16, Feb. 26, 2015; hereinafter “unconstitutionality decision of this case”). After the Defendant’s request for retrial, this court made a decision to commence the retrial on March 15, 2017, and the said decision to commence the retrial became final and conclusive as is, since there was no legitimate filing of an appeal within the filing period.

2. Scope of the judgment of this court;

A. In an indivisible final and conclusive judgment that found one of several concurrent crimes guilty, where it is deemed that there exist grounds for the request for retrial only for a part of the facts constituting an offense, the decision to commence retrial has to be made as to the whole of the judgment. However, with respect to the facts constituting an offense for which there are no grounds for retrial under the nature of the system of retrial, which is an emergency remedy, the effect of the decision to commence retrial is to include that part in the judgment formally, and thus, the retrial court shall re-examine that part.