Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part of the judgment of conviction and the judgment of the court of second instance in the attached Form 2 of the List of Offenses (3) of the judgment of the court of second instance.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. As to the judgment of the court below 1, there were errors in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the facts alleged in the judgment of the court below 1, which led to the misunderstanding of facts concerning the background, purpose, etc. leading the Defendant to the instant case, and in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the anti-state organization, foreign expressive materials, and foreign purpose under the National Security Act.

B) The sentence of the lower court (eight months of imprisonment and one year of suspension of qualifications) which is unfair in sentencing is too unreasonable.

2) The judgment of the court below which acquitted the prosecutor of the facts on the violation of the National Security Act (e.g., supporting quantity, rubber, etc.) by distributing pro ratas Nos. 1, 54, 56 attached to the List of Crimes Nos. 14, 26, and 1 in the judgment of the court of first instance, which is listed in the judgment of the court of first instance as follows. The judgment of the court below is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts.

B) The sentence of the lower court’s 1st sentence is too unhued and unreasonable.

B. As to the judgment of the court below of the second instance, the court below acquitted the defendant as to the prosecutor (misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles) - The judgment of the court below 2 erred by misconception of facts as to the pro-enemy and pro-enemy purpose, and by misunderstanding

2. Determination

A. According to the facts of the Defendant’s mistake and misapprehension of legal principles as to the judgment of the first instance court, the fact that there is considerable progress for peace and reconciliation, such as: (a) mistake of the facts about North Korea’s organization; and (b) determination of misapprehension of legal principles as to the assertion of misapprehension of legal principles, the fact that the Republic of Korea recognized North Korea as the counter-party to exchange and cooperation; and (c) announcement of the joint declaration, is recognized.

However, despite such changes in the relationship between South and North Korea, North Korea still has the nature as an anti-state organization that takes the responsibility for returning our free democracy system while improving the routes of hostile unification, and therefore, the normative power of the National Security Act that regulates anti-state organizations continues to exist.