Where a person commits a crime punishable by imprisonment without prison labor or heavier after three years have passed since he/she was exempted from the execution of punishment on special amnesty, the application of the provisions of a repeated crime shall be made.

Where a person who has been sentenced to imprisonment without prison labor or a heavier punishment commits a crime falling under imprisonment without prison labor or a heavier punishment after three years have passed since he/she was exempted from the execution of the punishment for special amnesty, the provisions of this Article for a repeated crime may

Article 35 of the Criminal Act

Defendant

Gangnam branch support of the first instance court, Seoul High Court of the second instance, etc.

In a case where a person who was sentenced to imprisonment without prison labor or heavier punishment for 3 years after he was exempted from the execution of punishment on special amnesty, commits a crime punishable by imprisonment without prison labor or heavier punishment, the provisions of Article 35 of the Criminal Act should not be applied. According to the previous record prepared by the Gangwon Branch of the Chuncheon District Prosecutors' Office and records, the defendant was sentenced to three years of imprisonment for a short term of one year with prison labor for the defendant for residential intrusion theft in the Gangseo Branch of the Chuncheon District Court on March 28, 1955, which became final and conclusive on January 1, 1956, and the judgment can be found as a special amnesty under Article 9 of the Amnesty Court Act as of January 1, 1956. Thus, the criminal facts of this case committed on June 3, 1959 for which three years have passed since they were exempted from the execution of punishment on special amnesty, despite that Article 35 of the Criminal Act does not apply to the repeated crime, the court below erred by applying the same Article.

Justices Oh-Chopon (Presiding Judge) Madon Kim Jong-soo and Madon business start-up