2014Do9294 A. Violation of the Public Official Election Act

B. Violation of the Staff of the National Intelligence Service Act

C. Performance of official duties by fraudulent means

1. (a). (c) A

2. (a) B

Defendant B and Prosecutor (Defendant B and Prosecutor against Defendants)

CG Law Firm (Attorneys E and D (Defendant A)

CK Law Firm (Attorneys G (Defendant B)

Seoul High Court Decision 2014No814 Decided July 10, 2014

December 27, 2016

All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to Defendant B’s ground of appeal

Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the evidence duly admitted by the first instance court, which maintained the reasoning of the lower judgment, the lower court was justifiable to have found Defendant B guilty of the violation of the Act on the Staff of National Intelligence Service due to the leakage of information, such as “the phone number of the NISJ staff,” the staff of the NIS staff of the NIS, the fact that K belongs to the J group, its affiliated team, and the vehicle operation situation of the said K and the NIS staff L. In so doing, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of free evaluation of evidence or by misapprehending the relevant legal doctrine, contrary to logical and empirical rules

2. As to the Prosecutor’s ground of appeal

According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court below, the court below was just in finding the Defendants not guilty on the charges (excluding the part of conviction against Defendant B) on the ground that there was no proof of crime, and it did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules or by misapprehending the relevant legal principles without exhaust all necessary deliberations.

Meanwhile, the Prosecutor appealed on the guilty portion of the lower judgment, but did not state the grounds of appeal as to this part in the petition of appeal or appellate brief.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, all appeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Kim Shin-chul

Justices Kim Yong-deok

Justices Kim Gin-young

Justices Lee Ki-taik