2015Do1650 Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (Habitual Violence)

A

Defendant

K Law Firm

Attorney I

Changwon District Court Decision 2015No1447 Decided October 7, 2015

February 18, 2016:

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

Judgment ex officio is made.

1. The former Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (Amended by Act No. 13718, Jan. 6, 2016)

Article 2 (1) of the former Punishment of Violences Act (hereinafter referred to as the "former Punishment of Violences Act") shall be construed as "Habitually following offenses:

Any person who commits a crime shall be punished in accordance with the following classification:

The Act of January 6, 2016 lists violent crimes and provides the statutory penalty accordingly.

Article 2(1) of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act amended and enforced by Act No. 13718 is deleted.

There was no transitional provision separately.

In such a case, there was a provision on aggravated elements for violent crimes under the Criminal Code.

The purpose of deletion of Article 2 (1) of the Punishment of Violences Act is the same as the aggravated constituent elements.

General risk of being a habitive wall of an act of violence, including the crimes listed in each subparagraph of paragraph;

Even if considered, the circumstances leading to the individual crime, the specific attitude of the act, and the degree of infringement of legal interests are very important.

On the other hand, it is unfair to punish the previous measure that is to be punished uniformly.

It should be viewed as sexual action.

Therefore, this crime is committed by the amendment of the law after the crime under Article 1 (2) of the Criminal Code.

Since a sentence does not constitute or is less than that of the old law, it constitutes a new law in accordance with the above provision.

Supreme Court Decision 2009Do12930 Decided March 11, 2010; Supreme Court Decision 2009Do12930 Decided July 11, 2013

2013Do4862, 2013 Jeondo101, etc.

2. As to the facts charged in this case where the defendant habitually assaulted the victim C

The judgment of conviction by applying Article 2(1)1 of the former Punishment of Violences Act and Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act

The first instance judgment was affirmed.

However, according to the above legal principles, the facts charged of this case is conducted pursuant to Article 1(2) of the Criminal Act.

Since the provisions of the former Punishment of Violences Act cannot be applied to a corporation, the judgment of the court below is no longer maintained.

It became impossible to do so.

3. Therefore, without examining the grounds of appeal, we reverse the judgment below, and further reverse the case.

The case shall be remanded to the court below for a trial and determination. The opinion of all participating Justices' assent

(2) It is so decided as per Disposition.

Justices Lee Dong-won

Justices Lee In-bok

The Chief Justice Park Jae-young

Justices Kim Gin-young