logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 2015.11.26 2015도14317
상해등
Text

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

Reasons

Judgment ex officio is made.

Of the facts charged in the instant case, the lower court upheld the first instance judgment convicting the Defendant by 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 “former Punishment of Violences”) and Article 283(1) of the Criminal Act, and Article 283(1) of the Criminal Act.

However, after the judgment of the court below was rendered, the Constitutional Court rendered a decision of unconstitutionality as to Article 3(1) of the former Punishment of Violences Act with regard to “a person who commits a crime under Article 283(1) of the Criminal Act by carrying a deadly weapon or other dangerous articles” (see, e.g., Constitutional Court Order 2014HunBa154, Sept. 24, 2015). Accordingly, the legal provision in question retroactively lost its effect pursuant to Article 47(3) of the Constitutional Court Act.

In a case where the penal law or the legal provision becomes retroactively null and void due to the decision of unconstitutionality, the defendant's case which was prosecuted by applying the pertinent law does not constitute a crime, and the judgment of the court below which found the guilty of this part of the facts charged was no longer maintained.

Therefore, the part of the judgment of the court below regarding the violation of the Punishment of Violences Act (collectively weapons, etc.) should be reversed. Since the remaining crimes that the court below found guilty and concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act are concurrent crimes, the judgment of the court below should be

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

arrow