beta
Text
All appeals are dismissed.
Reasons
The grounds of appeal are examined.
1. As to the Defendant’s ground of appeal
A. As to the assertion of misapprehension of the legal principles as to anti-government organizations under Article 2 of the National Security Act, North Korea is a partner of dialogue and cooperation for the peaceful unification of South and North Korea, but on the other hand, despite the changes in the relationship between South and North Korea, North Korea still has the nature of anti-government organizations which are bound to adopt the system of our liberal democracy while maintaining the proper unification route, and therefore, the normative power of the National Security Act regulating anti-government organizations is still valid.
(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2010Do1189 Decided July 23, 2010 (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2010Do1189, Jul. 23, 2010). The judgment of the court below is justifiable, and contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, there
B. The court below rejected the Defendant’s assertion that there was no fact that he did not manage grans in the East Asia because he was a graduate student at the time of July 2006 and was not a member of the East Asia, and held that the Defendant could have held the 36th class of expressive materials (hereinafter “each class of expressive materials of this case”) in the custody of the 36th class of expressive materials in the process of managing the grans in the East Asia around July 2006.
The judgment below
Examining the reasoning in light of the evidence duly admitted, the above determination by the court below is just, and contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, there is no illegality of misapprehending the rules of logic and experience and free evaluation of evidence.
C. As to the assertion of misapprehension of the legal principle as to the purpose of the act of immigration, the crime under Article 7(5) of the National Security Act is produced, imported, copied, possessed, transported, distributed or sold with the intent of committing the act of immigration under Articles 1, 3 and 4.