The motion for retrial of this case is dismissed.

1. According to the records in this case, on May 22, 2014, this court rendered a judgment of conviction against a person who requested a retrial on the grounds of Article 5-4(6) and (1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes by applying Articles 329, 330, 331(1), and 342 of the Criminal Act, and sentenced him to five years of imprisonment, and the above judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

2. On February 26, 2015, after the Constitutional Court rendered a decision for review that Article 5-4(1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes would be unconstitutional, there are grounds for retrial in the decision for review.

3. In a case where the Constitutional Court unconstitutionality decision with respect to the provisions of the Act on the Punishment, etc. or the provisions of the Act, a person who was convicted by applying the provisions of the Act or the provisions of the Act may request a retrial pursuant to Article 47(3) and (4) of the Constitutional Court Act, and the effect of the Constitutional Court unconstitutional decision pursuant to Article 47 of the Constitutional Court Act is limited to the provisions of the Act or the provisions of other Acts and the provisions of other Acts and the provisions of other Acts and the Act

(2) Article 5-4(1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (amended by Act No. 10210, Mar. 31, 2010), Article 329 of the Criminal Act, Article 5-4(1) of the same Act, Article 329 of the Criminal Act, Article 5-4(1) of the same Act, Article 363 of the Criminal Act, Article 362(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 363 of the same Act, Article 363 of the same Act, Article 362(4) of the same Act, which provides that “acquisition” under Article 362(1) of the Criminal Act, is against the Constitution, and Article 5-4(1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (amended by Act No. 10210, Feb. 26, 2015)