Defendants are acquitted.

1. Summary of the facts charged

A. Defendant A is a person who completed a marriage report with D on March 29, 1995.

On February 2, 2007, the Defendant sent the trade name in Gangnam-gu, Seoul Police Officer at the Moel where it is impossible to know the trade name, which he was sexually disturbed with B.

B. Defendant B knew that he is a spouse of A, the Defendant conspiredd with A once and ever at the same time and place as the foregoing in the same manner as that of the preceding paragraph.

2. Article 241 of the Criminal Act, which is a legal provision applicable to the facts charged in the instant case, was decided as unconstitutional according to the decision of the Constitutional Court on February 26, 2015 by the full bench, including the 2009HunBa17, etc.

As a result, Article 241 of the Criminal Code retroactively lost its effect on October 31, 2008, following the date of the previous constitutional decision (the Constitutional Court Decision 2007Hun-Ga decided on October 30, 2008) in accordance with the proviso of Article 47(3) of the Constitutional Court Act, pursuant to the proviso of Article 47(3) of the Constitutional Court Act.

However, as in the instant case, insofar as Article 241 of the former Criminal Act, which had existed as at the time of the commission of the crime, became null and void retroactively from the following day after the date of the final decision of unconstitutionality, such as the above 2009Hun-Ba 17, etc., and the proviso of Article 47(3) of the Constitutional Court Act ( October 31, 2008) pursuant to the proviso of Article 47(3) of the Constitutional Court Act, becomes null and void, such act shall be deemed to constitute “when the sentence is repealed due to the repeal or repeal of the statutes after the commission of the crime.”

Therefore, the Defendants are acquitted in accordance with Article 326 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.