(b) Ascertainment of whether or not a person constituting an organization for the purpose of government unification has the purpose of national defense with respect to the establishment of a new governing organization;

C. Whether a meeting among members of an anti-government organization does not constitute a separate meeting as an element of an anti-government organization.

B. The expression "the Government" under Article 1 of the former National Security Act (No. 549, Jun. 10, 1960) and "the change of the country" are required to form a group of the government with the aim of booming the government and specifically form the establishment of a new government after the government uniform. However, if the government formed an organization for the booming of the government, it is not necessary to refer to the new government as to the establishment of a new government organization or to comply with the purpose of national defense.

C. The National Security Act or the former anti-public law (No. 643, Jul. 3, 1961) shall punish the organization of anti-government organizations as well as regulate the specific activities, etc. of the anti-government organizations. Thus, a meeting among members of anti-government organizations shall not be included in the crime of forming an anti-government organization, but constitutes an offense under Article 8 (1) of the National Security Act (Article 5 of the former anti-public law).

The twenty-five days, out of the number of days pending trial after the appeal, shall be included in the principal sentence.

1. On the first ground of appeal by the Defendant’s defense counsel, it is reasonable to view that the Constitution of the Republic of Korea guarantees fundamental human rights and declares the freedom of religion, conscience, the freedom of speech, the press, the freedom of assembly and association, the freedom of studies and arts, and furthermore, if it is restricted to respect the freedom and rights of the people and to maintain the national security and order or for the public welfare, this is consistent with the ideology of free democracy that ensures the fundamental rights of the people and respects the creativity and dignity of an individual.

However, in the natural law theory, the constitutional provisions pertaining to fundamental rights to protect the astronomical freedom of human beings from the power of the State, on the one hand, by declaring the right to lead a life worthy of human dignity, are established under the sacrifice of the fundamental rights of the State. Article 35(2) of the Constitution of the Republic of Korea provides that all freedom and rights of the people can be restricted by law only in cases where it is necessary for national security or maintenance of public order and order, and even in cases where it is restricted, the fundamental rights pertaining to human mental life such as the freedom of religion, the freedom of conscience, the freedom of learning, and the freedom of arts cannot be regulated by the internal mental aspect of the human body, and thus, it cannot be restricted by any Act in light of its nature. However, if the fundamental rights pertaining to human mental life such as the freedom of religion, the freedom of conscience, the religious assembly, or academic or artistic assembly and association of the State are all externally or externally, and thus, it cannot be justified by the court below's decision that there is no violation of the national security law or public order.

2. As to the grounds of appeal Nos. 2, 4, and 5 of the same attorney-at-law and the ground of appeal No. 1 of the same attorney-at-law

Article 1 of the former National Security Act (No. 1960.6.10, No. 549) provides that the name of the Government and the change of the State shall be referred to as the "Non-Indicted 1" of the same Article, which constitutes a group of the Government for the purpose of uniforming the government and establishing a new government after uniforming the government. However, if the members of the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs form an organization for the purpose of uniforming the Government, it should be viewed that the government should naturally demand specific form of government such as North Korea leader after uniforming the government in light of empirical rule or private law, and there is no need to see the government as to establishing new government organizations after the establishment of the government or achieve the purpose of national change. As such, the first instance judgment maintained by the court below is not inconsistent with the reasoning of the judgment of the court below, and thus, it is necessary for the defendant to capture the religious doctrine to build a public-private society in accordance with the clear public-private partnership system, and to emphasize the general purpose and public-private partnership to promote various social standards by fostering and dis-privateization.

3. As to the ground of appeal No. 3 by the same attorney Kang Jae-ok

The purpose of Article 8 (1) of the National Security Act or the repealed Anti-Public Law (No. 643 of July 3, 1961) is to secure the security of the State and the lives and freedom of citizens by regulating anti-state activities which may endanger the security of the State. Thus, the organization of anti-government organizations should be punished, as well as the specific activities of the anti-government organizations should also be regulated. Thus, it is reasonable to say that the meeting among members of the anti-government organizations constitutes an offense under Article 8 (1) of the National Security Act (Article 5 of the former Anti-Public Law) and to dismiss it. In this purport, the first instance court's decision maintained by the court below was justified in its measures against the violation of Article 8 (1) of the National Security Act that the defendant met with the members of the anti-government organization, and the meeting of members of the anti-government organization cannot be adopted merely because it is an independent opinion that it does not constitute an

4. The grounds of appeal Nos. 6 and 7 by the same attorney Kang Jin-ok and the same attorney Lee Byung-ok

As to the grounds of appeal Nos. 2 and 3:

According to the evidence of the first instance court maintained by the court below, it is sufficient to recognize the facts that the members of an anti-government organization act in concert with the activities of the anti-government organization, which is an anti-government organization, and that there is no error of misunderstanding of legal principles or misunderstanding of facts in the court below's fact-finding, and the fact-finding of the court below's argument that it is against the obligation of democratic citizens, which eventually leads to social confusion, and ultimately, it is clear that it is a single opinion that justifys the illegality, conspiracy, assembly, etc. of North Korea, which is likely to benefit North Korea by seriously affecting the national security.

5. Ultimately, the appeal is dismissed and the twenty-five days out of the number of days of confinement after the appeal shall be included in the principal sentence. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Lee Il-young (Presiding Justice)