Defendants shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, for one year from the date this judgment became final and conclusive against the Defendants.

Punishment of the crime

1. Defendant A is a person who is a spouse who has completed a marriage report with C on November 5, 1990. A

On December 2, 2008, the Defendant sent sexual intercourse with B one time at the mutual incompetence in Seoul Jung-gu, Jung-gu.

B. At the end of December 2008, the Defendant sent sexual intercourse with B and once at the mutually incompetence near the Masan-dong, Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul.

C. Around January 2009, the Defendant provided a single sexual intercourse with B and Etecom located in Gwangjin-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City D.

Around February 2009, the Defendant sent sexual intercourse with B and once at the above Eel.

E. Around April 2009, the Defendant sent sexual intercourse with B at the above Eel.

In this respect, the defendant was sent to the above B more than five times.

2. Defendant B knew that the above Defendant was a spouse of the above A, and even at the same time, at the same place as that of the above paragraph (1), the Defendant had sexual intercourses with A five times, respectively.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Statement of the police statement regarding C;

1. A complaint;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes of the warden receipt certificate center;

1. Defendants of relevant legal provisions concerning criminal facts: Article 241(1) of the Criminal Act

1. Defendants from among concurrent crimes: the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act; and

1. The Defendants subject to suspended execution: It is so decided as per Disposition on the grounds of not less than Article 62(1) of each Criminal Code (such as the fact that the Defendants reflect their respective mistakes and that there was no past record of punishment).