The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Of the facts charged in this case, the defendant No. 3. A of the judgment of the court below.

List of Offenses

1. Serial 1.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The indictment of this case is in violation of the principle of an indictment only, since all of the indictments in this case were written in the facts unrelated to the facts charged, the defendant's activity process and the anti-government organization of North Korea are excessively recorded, and thus, the prosecution of this case has to be dismissed under Article 327 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act.

B. Compared to the fact that an actor was aware of pro-enemy pro-enemy contents and committed an act under Article 7(5) of the National Security Act, the lower court acknowledged the pro-enemy purpose without any justifiable grounds, even though the actor did not presume that there was a pro-enemy purpose. 2) The lower court acknowledged the pro-enemy purpose of the Defendant, without any justifiable grounds. Inasmuch as the Defendant’s writing, comments, comments, etc. were merely expressed in the abolition of the National Security Act, criticism against the O government, or the Defendant’s simple debate, it is difficult to view that there is a clear and present danger related to the formation uniform, etc., and thus, it is difficult to view

3) The literal meaning of possession is “a condition de facto controlling an object” and its object is limited to the material that may be factual and physically controlled by an object, and thus, documents kept in the electronic information form as an object of possession does not constitute “personal expression” subject to possession. C. The punishment sentenced by the lower court on the grounds of unfair sentencing (two months of imprisonment, eight months, and one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable and unfair. On January 27, 2012, the Defendant did not appeal to the Seoul Central District Court for a suspended sentence of two years of imprisonment with prison labor for a crime of praise, rubber, etc., and did not appeal the same year.

2.3. The above judgment became final and conclusive.

The facts constituting the instant crime reveal that the Defendant’s existence and security or free democratic fundamental order may be endangered from January 31, 201 to January 14, 2013, which was before and after the said final judgment.