logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 2015.12.23. 선고 2015도16230 판결
폭력행위등처벌에관한법률위반(집단·흉기등협박),업부방해,공무집행방해
Cases

2015Do16230 Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a collective, deadly weapons, etc.), business

Non-Obstruction, obstruction of Performance of Official Duties

Defendant

A

Appellant

Defendant

Defense Counsel

Attorney N(N)

The judgment below

Gwangju District Court Decision 2015No1865 Decided October 6, 2015

Imposition of Judgment

December 23, 2015

Text

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

Reasons

The grounds of appeal are examined.

Of the facts charged in the instant case, the lower court found the Defendant guilty by applying Articles 3(1) and 2(1)1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act and Article 283(1) of the Criminal Act with regard to intimidation to carry dangerous articles on or around April 29, 2015 (hereinafter “The Punishment of Violences Act”). However, on September 24, 2015, the Constitutional Court rendered a decision that “the part concerning a person who committed a crime under Article 283(1) (Intimidation) of the Criminal Act by carrying a deadly weapon or other dangerous articles under Article 3(1) of the Punishment of Violences Act (hereinafter “instant provision”) shall be unconstitutional.”

If so, the provision of this case is unconstitutional, pursuant to Article 47 (3) of the Constitutional Court Act.

The judgment of the court below that found the defendant guilty of the facts charged in this Section becomes unable to be maintained as it is, because the violation of the Punishment of Violences Act is retroactively null and void, and the remaining part of the judgment below that found the defendant guilty should be sentenced to one punishment due to concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below should be reversed without examining the remaining grounds of appeal, 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 on the bench.

Judges

The presiding judge shall keep the record of the Justice

Justices Kim Yong-deok

Chief Justice Park Jong-young

Justices Kim Jae-han

arrow