logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 2015.12.10 2015도16462
폭력행위등처벌에관한법률위반(집단ㆍ흉기등협박)등
Text

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

Reasons

Of the facts charged in the instant case, the lower court upheld the first instance judgment that convicted the Defendant 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 respect to intimidation to carry a deadly weapon (hereinafter “Assault Punishment 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 Articles 260(1) and 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 Order 2014HunBa154, Sept. 24, 2015). The provision of the above Act retroactively loses its effect pursuant to the main sentence of 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is not a crime, and the judgment of the court below which found the guilty of this part of the facts charged was no longer maintained.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 below regarding the violation of the Punishment of Violences Act (collectively weapons, etc.) should be reversed. Since the above part and the remaining part are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act and a single sentence were imposed on the defendant, the judgment of the court below should be reversed in its entirety.

Therefore, without further proceeding to decide on the remaining grounds of appeal, the lower judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded to the lower court for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

arrow