logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2017.03.08 2016재고단16
간통
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant is a person who has been married with D on June 14, 1999.

A. On March 14, 2010, the Defendant conspiredd with B and once with B in a female room in which it is impossible to identify the trade name in Jung-gu, Daejeon.

B. On August 2010, the Defendant taught the name of a woman in Daejeon-gu, Daejeon-gu, with B and once in a female room in which it is impossible to know the trade name.

(c)

On October 30, 2010, the Defendant sent sexual intercourse with B on October 17, 2010 at a female room in which the trade name in Jung-gu, Daejeon is unknown.

(d)

On November 13, 2010, the Defendant conspired with B on November 13, 2010 at a female room in which it is impossible to identify the trade name in Jung-gu, Daejeon, Daejeon.

E. On April 30, 201, around 15:30 on April 30, 201, the Defendant conspiredd with B and once with B in a female room where it is impossible to identify the trade name in Jung-gu, Daejeon.

F. On May 7, 2011, the Defendant taught the name of a woman in the Jung-gu Daejeon-gu, Daejeon-gu, with B and once with B at a female room where it is impossible to know the trade name in the Jung-gu, Daejeon-gu.

G. On December 15, 201, on December 15, 2011, the Defendant conspiredd with B and once with B at a female room in which it is impossible to identify the trade name in Daejeon-gu, Daejeon-gu.

Accordingly, the defendant was sent to the above B more than seven times.

2. The prosecutor charged a public prosecution against each of the facts charged in the instant case by applying Article 241(1) of the Criminal Act, and the judgment subject to a retrial, which was found guilty, became final and conclusive August 31, 2012.

On February 26, 2015, the Constitutional Court declared that Article 241 of the Criminal Act, including the aforementioned provisions of the Act, is in violation of the Constitution (the Constitutional Court Decision 2009Hun-Ba 17,205, 2010Hun-Ba 194, 2011Hun-Ba 4, 2012Hun-Ba 57, 255, 411, 2013Hun-Ba 139, 161, 267, 276, 342, 365, 2014Hun-Ba 53,464, 2014Hun-Ba 31,204Hun-Ba 4, 2014 (Joint) / [the Constitutional Court Decision 2008Hun-Ba 16, 207] The previous provisions are constitutional.

arrow