A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

One hundred-two days of detention before the pronouncement of the judgment below shall be included in the above sentence.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Therefore, as the main facts charged of the violation of the National Security Act are described later in detail. The defendant's act of escape from North Korea to North Korea as an anti-government organization under the National Security Act is known to be an act that may endanger the existence, safety or democratic fundamental order of the Republic of Korea, and it was discovered that he escaped from North Korea to North Korea and attempted to escape from North Korea. The court below found that the defendant's act of escape to North Korea as an anti-government organization under the National Security Act should be deemed to be an act of demonstration of the balance between the free democracy system of the Republic of Korea and the free democracy, and thus, the defendant's act cannot be deemed to be an act of demonstration of the danger of existence and security or democratic fundamental order of the Republic of Korea. The defendant's act of escape in this case cannot be deemed to be an act of demonstrationing the balance of the free democracy system of the Republic of Korea. Thus, the danger of escape in this case cannot be deemed to be an incidental act, and thus, it cannot be deemed to have satisfied the requirements of the above Act.

However, since Article 6 (1) of the National Security Act punishs a person who escaped to an area under the control of an anti-government organization with the knowledge of the fact that it may endanger the existence and security of the State or democratic fundamental order, the act of entering an area under the control of an anti-government organization shall be deemed to conflict with the above provision except where such act does not pose any danger of endangering the national existence and security or democratic fundamental order. The court below held that the act of entering an area under the control of an anti-government organization is in conflict with the above provision merely because it is an individual motive of the above act, and thus, it is entirely irrelevant with the constituent elements of the above provision, and since the act of entering the area under the control of an anti-government organization does not pose any danger of endangering the existence and security of the State or democratic fundamental order, the act of entering the area under the control of an anti-government organization cannot be seen as endangering the fundamental order of North Korea as an area where there is no risk of endangering the existence and security of the State or democratic fundamental order.

Accordingly, this Court reverses the judgment of the court below in accordance with Article 364 (2) and (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act and decides again as follows after the pleading.

Criminal facts

The defendant, as an anti-government organization consisting of illegal organizations for the purpose of representing the government and disturbing the nation, set the principle of inter-Korean unification as an anti-Korean organization, and formed the anti-Korean Maritime Revolution and anti-Korean Democratic Democratic Democratic Revolution centered on the anti-Korean effic effic effic effic efic efic efic efic efic efic efic efic efic efic efic efic efic efic efic efic efic efic efic efic efic efic efic efic efic efic efic efic efic efic efic efic efic efic efic efic efic efic efic efic efic fic efics.

1. 1994. 9. 8. 김포공항으로 입국 귀순한 이래 당국의 보호하에 사회적응기간을 거쳐 1995. 1. 27. 정부로부터 사회정착금 1,400만 원을 지급받아 사회에 배출된 후, 강서구 화곡동 소재 현대천막기업사, 부천시 오정구 내동 소재 금강정기사, 부천 남부역 주변 건설 현장, 식품가게 및 신문배달원, 부천 원미구 소사동 소재 부천기업, 양천구 목동 소재 슈퍼 100 골프스쿨, 강서구 등촌동 소재 청룡주유소 등에 취업하였으나 귀순 당시 대학진학 또는 직업군인으로 복무해 보겠다는 꿈이 경제력이 뒷받침 되지 않는 등으로 인해 좌절되고, 특별한 기술이나 재능이 없어 전망 있는 직장을 구하지 못하게 되자 북한보다 잘 살기는 하지만 북한에서와 마찬가지로 이 사회에서도 하층민으로서 생활해야 한다는 데 대한 불만과 장래에 대한 불안감이 가중되는 한편, 북한에서 경제적으로 어렵게 살고 있는 부모 형제들을 버리고 와서 혼자서만 편하게 지내고 있다는 자책감에 고심하던 중 가족단위 귀순자 김만철, 여만철 등이 남한 국민으로부터 많은 환영을 받고 잘 살고 있음을 보고 피고인도 밀입북하여 가족을 귀순시키면 설혹 법에 저촉되더라도 용서와 환대를 받을 수 있을 것이라고 판단한 나머지 중국으로 밀항, 북한으로 탈출할 것을 결심하고, 그 실행 방법으로 본인이 혼자서 북한에 잠입하여 가족을 데리고 나오는 방안과, 중국 연변 주변의 무술인들을 매수·고용하여 대동하고 가족을 데리고 나오는 방안 등 2가지 방법을 상정하고 세부적 실천방안으로 피고인이 탈북하여 은신·체류하였던 중국의 이철만(47, 농업)가를 방문, 북한 거주 가족 소식 및 북한의 정세 등을 확인, 입북시기는 96. 4.∼5.경 농번기로 북한 인민경비대의 경비 소홀, 봄철 갈수기로 강수면이 낮아지는 점을 이용, 북한 내 활동을 위해 중국 집안에서 북한 돈으로 환전하고 뇌물용으로 중국 술, 담배도 구입, 조·중 국경에서 교통이 불편하고 경비가 소홀한 북한 만포지역을 택하여 야음을 틈타 압록강으로 도강, 내륙 교통편은 화물차 및 열차편을 몰래 타고 북한 가족 거주지인 평남 개천시까지 이동, 가족 거주지는 외딴 곳에 위치하므로, 주변을 관찰 후 야심한 시간을 이용하여 먼저 여동생들을 불러내 탈북계획을 설명하고 함께 가족들을 설득하여 이동, 탈출 방법은 평남 개천시 후미진 도로변에서 은신 후 야간 또는 새벽에 화물차를 탈취, 가족과 함께 동 차량으로 조·중 국경선인 만포시에 도착, 초소는 평북 향산군 묘향산에 1개초소, 만포시에 1개초소, 송원에 1개초소가 있으나 길을 잘 알고 있어 초소를 우회할 수 있고, 검문시 중국담배 등을 주면 통과 가능, 1차 도강한 위치인 운봉에서 야심한 시간을 이용, 가족과 함께 중국 집안으로 탈북, 북경 한국 대사관에 가족과 함께 귀순을 요청하고 불허시 천진, 위해 등지에서 밀항 입국키로 하는 등 사전에 치밀한 탈출계획을 수립하고, 1995. 12.초순경부터 1996. 1. 12.경까지 사이에 전세보증금을 환수하는 등으로 가지고 있는 모든 돈을 미화로 환전 14,950$를 준비하고, 1996. 1. 22. 20:00경 인천항 경비실태 등을 관찰하다가 인천항 철조망을 월담하여 국내화물선 인근 부두에 일본 및 중국선박들이 정박중임을 확인하고 노무자로 위장하여 자연스럽게 중국화물선에 접근하여 중국 천진선적의 화물선 "만강산"(FUKANG SHAN)호를 발견하고 기관실 내 7층에 몰래 승선한 후 같은 해 2. 1.경까지 사이에 총 5∼6회에 걸쳐 부두철조망 및 출입문을 통해 통제구역 밖을 드나들며 관찰한 결과 동 화물선 선원들이 사료를 운반하는 속도로 보아 쉽게 출항할 선박이 아니라고 판단하여 동 선박을 타고 중국으로 갈 것을 포기하고, 같은 해 2. 2. 22:00경 위 만강산호 옆에 정박중인 중국 대련선적의 화물선 "화중호"(HUA ZHONG)가 중국으로 곧바로 가는 배인 것으로 판단하고 몰래 승선하여 기관실 내 맨 위층 연통 부분에 은신하고 있다가, 같은 해 2. 3. 04:00경 동 선박이 인천항을 출항하였으나 항해 도중 대련항 도착예상시간(약 10시간)보다 지연되고 있고, 태양을 기준으로 배 이동방향을 볼때 중국으로 항해하지 않는다고 판단, 같은 해 2. 4. 12:00경 기관실을 나오던 중 선원들에게 발각되어 같은 날 20:00경 울산항에서 검거됨으로써 국가의 존립·안전이나 자유민주적 기본질서를 위태롭게 한다는 정을 알면서 반국가단체의 지배하에 있는 북한으로의 탈출을 예비하고,

2. Without any passport, seaman’s pocketbook or other valid proof required for departure from the Republic of Korea issued by the relevant authorities, at around 22:00 on February 2, 1996, at Incheon port, the "HUA ZHNG" (HUG) judged that the cargo ship of the Chinese substitute shipment was immediately a ship to China and immediately go to China, and attempted to go to an area other than the Republic of Korea on board a ship thereafter and go to the port outside the Republic of Korea on February 4, 199 of the same year, the ship was discovered to the crew on February 4, 199, and was arrested from Ulsan port, and the ship was

3. Without the permission of the authorities, in the above temporary place from the beginning of December 1995 to the end of January 12, 1996, in possession of the remaining US$14,700 (Evidence No. 2) remaining after the consumption of all the US$ 14,950 (Evidence No. 2) which was made and made up for the redemption of the deposit from the beginning of January 12, 1995 to the end of January 12, 1996, and tried to export the deposit to China by going in transit to the said "Seae No. 14,70 (No. 2).

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement that conforms to each of the facts stated in the original judgment by the defendant;

1. Each statement made on the accused prepared by a prosecutor and a judicial police officer, which corresponds to each fact in the suspect examination protocol;

1. Each statement that corresponds to the exchange of US dollars as stated in each statement of gambling and long-term interest preparation;

1. Each description that conforms to the facts stated in each investigation report prepared by a judicial police officer;

1. A statement that the defendant seizes Chapter 147 (No. 2) on the 100 U.S. dollars from the defendant in the record of seizure prepared by the judicial police officer;

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning criminal facts;

Article 6(5) and (1) of the National Security Act; Article 3(2) and (1) of the Stows Control Act; Article 31(2) and (1)3 of the former Foreign Exchange Control Act (amended by Act No. 5040, Dec. 29, 1995); Article 19 (Selection of Imprisonment)

1. Commercial competition;

Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act (the punishment imposed on a violation of the National Security Act and a violation of the Stacking and Stacking shall be imposed more severe than the punishment)

1. Aggravation of concurrent crimes;

The former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act (Aggravation of punishment for a violation of the National Security Act, which is heavier than punishment)

1. Calculation of days of detention;

Article 57 of the Criminal Act

1. Suspension of execution;

Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (U.S. no record of punishment previously imposed and considering circumstances such as the motive and circumstance of escape reserve)

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.

Judge Jeong Young-hoon (Presiding Judge)