The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Korea amended the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes by Act No. 10210 on February 26, 2015 in the case of 2014Hun-Ga16, 19, 23 (Consolidation)

B. The Specific Crimes Aggravated Punishment Act (hereinafter “Specific Crimes Aggravated Punishment Act”)

Part concerning Article 329 of the Criminal Act among Article 5-4(1), part concerning the attempted crimes under Article 329 of the Criminal Act among Article 329 of the same Act, and part concerning "acquisition" under Article 362(1) of the Criminal Act among Article 363 of the same Act are unconstitutional.

"The decision of unconstitutionality of this case" (hereinafter referred to as "the decision of unconstitutionality of this case") has been rendered, and the effect of the decision of unconstitutionality of this case shall be deemed to affect Article 5-4 (6) of the Specific Crimes Aggravated Punishment

Nevertheless, the lower court determined that the effect of the instant decision of unconstitutionality did not extend to Article 5-4(6) of the Specific Crimes Aggravated Punishment Act by misapprehending the legal doctrine on this part.

B. The lower court’s sentence 2 years and 9 months and confiscation, which the Defendant sentenced, are too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of misapprehension of the legal doctrine, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for at least three years and sentenced to forfeiture on July 19, 2013 in accordance with Article 5-4(6) and (1) of the Specific Crimes Aggravated Punishment Act and Article 329 of the Criminal Act (hereinafter referred to as “the subject judgment on review”) on the ground of criminal facts that “the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for at least two years for the violation of the Specific Crimes Aggravated Punishment Act” and was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for at least three years on July 19, 2013, and was finally affirmed (hereinafter referred to as “the subject judgment on review”).

(2) The Defendant filed a petition for a new trial on the judgment subject to a new trial with Seoul Eastern District Court 2015 Inventory 4, and the said court rendered a decision of commencing a new trial on April 15, 2015, and thereafter, the said decision of commencing a new trial became final and conclusive as is, on the grounds that there was no legitimate filing of an appeal within the appeal period.

3. The name of the defendant in the trial proceedings of the court below, which are the principal case following the decision to commence the above retrial.