logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 2015.12.10 2015도16120
폭력행위등처벌에관한법률위반(집단ㆍ흉기등협박)등
Text

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

Reasons

Judgment ex officio is made.

Of the facts charged in the instant case, the lower court convicted the Defendant by applying Articles 3(1) and 2(1)1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (amended by Act No. 12896, Dec. 30, 2014; hereinafter “Assault Punishment Act”) and Article 283(1) of the Criminal Act.

However, after the judgment of the court below was rendered, the Constitutional Court rendered a decision of unconstitutionality on the part concerning “a person who commits a crime under Article 283(1) (Intimidation) of the Criminal Act by carrying a deadly weapon or other dangerous object” under Article 3(1) of the Punishment of Violences Act applied by the court below (see, e.g., Constitutional Court Decision 2014Hun-Ba154, Sept. 24, 2015). Accordingly, the aforementioned legal provision retroactively loses its effect pursuant to Article 47(3) of the Constitutional Court Act.

In a case where the penal law or the legal provision becomes retroactively null and void due to the decision of unconstitutionality, the defendant's case prosecuted by applying the pertinent provision is not a crime, and the judgment of the court below which found the guilty of this part of the facts charged was no longer maintained.

Therefore, the part of the judgment of the court below regarding the violation of the Punishment of Violences Act (collectively weapons, etc.) should be reversed. Since each of the above parts and the remaining crimes of the defendant were sentenced to a single punishment in concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, the judgment of the court below should be reversed in

Therefore, without further proceeding to decide on the grounds of appeal, the judgment below is reversed, 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

arrow