The Defendants are not guilty.

Summary of Facts charged

A. On December 11, 1996, Defendant A is a person who has been married with C on December 11, 1996, and (i) around March 15, 2008, in a room in which it is impossible to identify the trade name in the Seocho-gu, Busan on March 15, 2008, Defendant A was sent to B with a single sexual intercourse with B, and (ii) around August 2, 2008, in a room in which it is impossible to identify the trade name in the Dong-gu, Busan on August 2, 2008, where it is impossible to identify the family name in the Dong-dong, Busan on August 2, 2008;

B. Defendant B knew that he is a spouse of A, and even at the same time and place as described in the foregoing paragraph (a) above, Defendant B conspiredd with A twice as above, respectively.

2. As to each of the facts charged in the instant case, the public prosecutor instituted a public prosecution by applying Article 241(1) of the former Criminal Act (amended by Act No. 13719, Jan. 6, 2016) respectively.

However, the Constitutional Court decided that the above legal provision is in violation of the Constitution (Supreme Court Decision 2009Hun-Ba17 Decided February 26, 2015, etc.).

According to the above unconstitutional decision, the above unconstitutional provision, which is a legal provision applicable to the facts charged of this case, has lost its effect retroactively on October 31, 2008, following the previous decision of constitutionality (the Constitutional Court Order 2007Hun-Ga17, Oct. 30, 2008, etc.) (the proviso of Article 47 (3) of the Constitutional Court Act), and the Constitutional Court may request a review pursuant to Article 47 (4) of the Constitutional Court Act "a final and conclusive judgment of conviction based on the law or the provisions of the law decided to be unconstitutional" refers to a final and conclusive judgment which has applied the law or the provisions of the law that retroactively lose its effect pursuant to paragraph (3) of the same Article due to the decision of constitutionality of the Constitutional Court.

Therefore, in a case where the provisions of the law or the law decided as unconstitutional lose its effect retroactively on the day following the date when the previous decision on constitutionality is rendered under the proviso of Article 3 (3) of the same Act, if the judgment of conviction was rendered after the day following the day when the decision on constitutionality is rendered, the criminal act was committed before.