The judgment below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Gwangju High Court.

Judgment ex officio is made.

Of the facts charged in the instant case, the lower court convicted the Defendant of violating Articles 3(1) and 2(1)1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (amended by Act No. 12896, Dec. 30, 2014; hereinafter “Assault Punishment Act”) and Article 283(1) of the Criminal Act.

However, after the judgment of the court below was rendered, the Constitutional Court rendered a decision of unconstitutionality on the part concerning "a person who commits a crime under Articles 260 (1), 283 (1), and 366 of the Criminal Act by carrying a deadly weapon or other dangerous object with him/her," which was applied by the court below (the Constitutional Court Decision 2014Hun-Ba154, 398 (merged), 2015Hun-Ba3, 9, 215Hun-Ga14, 2015 (Joint), 2015Hun-Ga3, 9, 2015Hun-Ga18, 20, and 25 (Joint) of the Punishment of Violences Act)" (Article 47 (3) of the Constitutional Court Act, which retroactively loses its effect pursuant to Article 47 (3) of the Act.

In a case where the penal law or the legal provision becomes retroactively null and void due to the decision of unconstitutionality, the defendant's case prosecuted by applying the pertinent provision constitutes a crime (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 91Do2825, May 8, 1992; 2005Do8317, Jun. 28, 2007) and thus, the judgment of the court below which convicted this part of the facts charged was no longer maintained.

Meanwhile, the lower court rendered a single sentence on the ground that the violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (Intimidation of collective weapons, etc.) and the remaining guilty parts are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and thus, the lower court’s judgment should be reversed in its entirety.

Therefore, without further proceeding to decide on the grounds of appeal, the lower judgment is reversed and the case is remanded to the lower court for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion. It is so decided by the assent of all participating Justices