logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 울산지방법원 2015.04.02 2015재고단1
간통
Text

The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

Reasons

1. The summary of the facts charged is as follows: (a) on April 2012, the Defendant was aware that he/she was his/her spouse; (b) on the part of a room in which he/she is unable to know about the heading room of Gatour located in F in the Northern-gu, Busan-si; and (c) on October 2012, the Defendant provided a single sexual intercourse with A in a room in which he/she is unable to know about the heading room of Gatour located in H in the Busan-gu, Busan-si, Busan-si.

2. Determination

A. The prosecutor prosecuted the facts charged in the instant case by applying Article 241(1) of the Criminal Act (amended by Act No. 293, Sept. 18, 1953) and the judgment subject to a retrial that found guilty was finalized on November 15, 2014.

B. However, on February 26, 2015, the Constitutional Court declared that Article 241 of the Criminal Act, including the applicable provisions, is unconstitutional.

[The Constitutional Court Decision 209Hun-Ba17,205, 2010Hun-Ba194, 2011Hun-Ba4, 2012Hun-Ba4, 2012Hun-Ba5, 255, 411, 2013Hun-Ba139, 161, 267, 276, 342, 365, 2014Hun-Ba53, 464, 201Hun-Ba31, 2011Hun-Ba31, 2014Hun-Ga4, 2014Hun-Ga4, which was decided as unconstitutional on February 26, 2015] The Constitutional Court Decision 201Hun-Ba (see Article 47(3) of the Constitutional Court Act), which retroactively loses its effect on the day following the date on which the previous decision was made (see Article 241 of the Criminal Act). Thus, the Constitutional Court Decision 2008Hun-Ba107, 308,207.

In light of the contents of the facts charged in the instant case and the time of confirmation of the judgment subject to a retrial, it is evident that the instant case is within the scope of retroactive effect.

C. Meanwhile, in a case where the legal provision on punishment becomes retroactively effective due to the decision of unconstitutionality, the defendant's case which was prosecuted by applying the pertinent legal provision is not a crime.

arrow