국가보안법위반등
The judgment below
The part against the Defendants is reversed.
Defendants are not guilty. The summary of this judgment is publicly announced.
1. The following facts are acknowledged according to the progress records of the case.
A. On September 9, 1968, the Defendants were indicted of violation of the National Security Act and the charge of preparation for insurrection. On January 18, 1969, the lower court rendered a not-guilty verdict on part of the facts charged against Defendant He/she on the grounds of the charges, and found the remainder of the facts charged and the facts charged against Defendant B guilty, and sentenced Defendant A to imprisonment with prison labor for 15 years, suspension of qualifications for 15 years, suspension of qualifications for 7 years and suspension of qualifications for Defendant B, respectively.
B. On May 27, 1969, the Seoul High Court rejected the Defendants and the Prosecutor’s assertion of misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles on the grounds of unfair sentencing on the following grounds: (a) accepted the Defendants’ respective claims on unfair sentencing; (b) reversed the judgment of the lower court, and subsequently sentenced the Defendants’ Network A to imprisonment with prison labor for 10 years, suspension of qualifications for 10 years, and suspension of qualifications for 5 years, and suspension of qualifications for 5 years, respectively.
(hereinafter referred to as the “instant judgment subject to a retrial”) C.
The Defendants appealed against the instant judgment subject to a retrial, but the Supreme Court dismissed the Defendants’ final appeal on September 23, 1969.
On the other hand, on October 23, 2014, the Defendants’ children filed a petition for a new trial on the instant judgment subject to a new trial with this Court 2014No61, and on February 25, 2015, the court rendered a decision to commence a new trial on the following grounds: “Inasmuch as the investigators belonging to the Central Information Department illegally arrested and arrested the Defendants and arrested the Defendants and charged them as accomplices, G et al. were found to have committed cruel acts, there is a ground for a new trial under Article 420 subparag. 7 and Article 422 of the Criminal Procedure Act in the instant judgment subject to new trial.” The decision to commence the new trial became final and conclusive as it is with the filing
2. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant A1) misunderstanding of facts (the guilty part of the original conviction) with G, etc.