The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. In light of the fact that the Defendant, despite the failure of the family by the Defendant’s act as the Defendant’s act, has consistently denied the crime from the investigative agency to the court of the court below, and did not recover from damage, etc., the lower court’s sentence that sentenced the Defendant to a community service order for 10 months, 2 years of suspended execution, and 100 hours of imprisonment is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. On February 26, 2015, the ex officio decision of the Constitutional Court rendered a decision of unconstitutionality as to Article 241 of the Criminal Act, which is the applicable provisions of the crime of adultery, among the facts charged in the instant case, in cases where the applicable provisions of the charges charged are retroactively invalidated due to the Constitutional Court’s decision of unconstitutionality, the relevant defendant’s case constitutes a case that does not constitute a crime (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2001Do3495, Mar. 10, 2005). The lower judgment that found the Defendant guilty of this part of the charges by applying Article 241 of the Criminal Act was no longer maintained

Therefore, since the part of the facts charged against the defendant in this case constitutes a crime and thus the verdict of innocence should be rendered pursuant to the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, this part of the facts charged is found guilty, and the judgment of the court below which sentenced the defendant to a single punishment on the ground that the remaining facts charged and the concurrent crimes in the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act

3. The court below's decision is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the prosecutor's assertion of unfair sentencing, on the grounds of ex officio reversal as above. The court below's decision is reversed as follows.

Criminal facts

On July 15, 2013, the Defendant entered the H private house separate from the H private house located in Gyeonggi-gu G on July 15, 2013, for the purpose of spreading with A, without the consent of the victim F, and entered the H private house separate from the victim’s house.