The defendant shall be innocent.

1. On March 29, 2012, the summary of the facts charged was known that the Defendant was a spouse of A, and the Defendant was sexual intercourse with A over 29 times from around that time to January 24, 2013, as indicated in the list of crimes in the attached Form, with the Defendant’s vehicle located in the Hanju-si river.

2. The prosecutor charged a public prosecution by applying Article 241(1) of the former Criminal Act (amended by Act No. 293, Sep. 18, 1953; hereinafter the same shall apply) that was deleted by Act No. 13719, Jan. 6, 2016 to each of the above facts charged. The judgment subject to a retrial that all of them were guilty was finalized on June 4, 2014.

In this regard, on February 26, 2015, the Constitutional Court sentenced Article 241 of the former Criminal Act to the effect that it is unconstitutional (Supreme Court Order 2009Hun-Ba17, 205, 2010Hun-Ba 194, 2011Hun-Ba 4, 2012Hun-Ba 57, 255, 411, 2013Hun-Ba 139, 161, 267, 276, 342, 365, 2014Hun-Ba 53, 464 (Consolidation), 201Hun-Ba 31, 205, and 2014Hun-Ba 4, 207). The Constitutional Court ruled that the above provision is retroactively null and void on the date of unconstitutionality of the Act (Supreme Court Order 2008Hun-Ga 37,207).

On the other hand, in a case where the provisions of the Punishment Act retroactively lose its validity due to the decision of unconstitutionality, the defendant's case which was prosecuted by applying the pertinent provisions of the Act constitutes a case where the defendant's case is not a crime (see Supreme Court Decision 2005Do8317, Jun. 28, 2007, etc.). 3. As such, each of the facts charged in this case constitutes a case where each of the facts charged in this case is not a crime, and thus, all of the defendants shall be acquitted pursuant to the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act. (