All of the prosecutions of this case are dismissed.

1. The summary of the facts charged is that Defendant A has a spouse who completed the marriage report with D on June 26, 2002, and Defendant B is a person engaged in self-business.

Defendant

A around February 2, 2011, at the Felel located in Ansan-si, Seosan-si E, together with the above B and once sexual intercourses. A, as described in the attached list of crimes, was sent to the above B throughout a total of 27 times from around that time to April 2013 in the same manner. Defendant B, despite being aware that the above spouse was a spouse, was sexual intercourses with the above A over 27 times in the above time and at the above place.

2. The judgment D’s lawsuit for divorce No. 2013DD 2013D 12250 filed against Defendant A was deemed to have been withdrawn due to the lack of the application for designation of the date by March 5, 2014, where the two parties were absent on two occasions, and where one month has elapsed thereafter, the lawsuit was deemed to have been withdrawn.

The facts charged in the instant case are crimes falling under Article 241(1) of the Criminal Act and can be punished only when a spouse's complaint is filed in accordance with Article 241(2) of the Criminal Act. Article 229 of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that in the case of Article 241 of the Criminal Act, no complaint may be filed unless the marriage is annulled or divorce lawsuit is instituted. In such cases, a complaint shall be deemed to have been revoked when the marriage

However, when a divorce lawsuit as stipulated in Article 229(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act is withdrawn, it shall include not only the withdrawal by the petitioner’s intention, but also the withdrawal of the request for divorce due to procedural defects, such as the absence of both parties. If a case of a request for divorce prior to a written notification is deemed to have been withdrawn as a cause of non-existence of both parties, a complaint, which is a requirement for institution of a complaint subject to victim’s complaint, is not filed (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 74Do2577, Nov. 25, 1975). Accordingly, in this case, the procedure for institution of public prosecution, which is brought without filing a complaint, is the procedure