The judgment below

The part against the defendant shall be reversed.

The defendant is not guilty. The defendant is not guilty.

1. The following facts are acknowledged according to the progress records of the case.

A. The Defendant was indicted on the charges of violation of the Presidential Emergency Measure No. 9 (Presidential Emergency Measure No. 9, May 13, 1975, hereinafter “Emergency Measure No. 9”) and the violation of the Anti-Public Law for the protection of national security and public order, such as the summary of the charges in the attached indictment, and on the charges of violation of the Emergency Measure No. 9 (Presidential Emergency Measure No.9

On February 27, 1976, the above court found the defendant guilty of all the charges against the defendant and sentenced the defendant to three years of imprisonment and suspension of qualification.

B. Accordingly, the Defendant appealed on the ground of mistake of facts, unreasonable sentencing, and the prosecutor’s appeal. On June 10, 1976, the Seoul High Court rejected the Defendant’s assertion of mistake as to the violation of Emergency Measure No. 9 by the above court 76No695 on the ground of the above court’s 76No695 on June 10, 1976. As to the Defendant’s violation of the above Emergency Measure No. 9, the lower court reversed the judgment on the ground that there is no evidence to acknowledge that the Defendant’s act would benefit an anti-government organization or its members, and sentenced the Defendant to two years of imprisonment and suspension of qualification for the violation of Emergency Measure No. 9, which was found guilty, and the part of the above judgment (hereinafter referred to as “the judgment on review”) against the Defendant

C. After that, on June 10, 2013, the applicant filed a request for a new trial as to the judgment subject to a new trial with this Court Decision 2013No65, which became final and conclusive on July 31, 2013, the court rendered a decision to commence a new trial as to the part of the judgment subject to new trial based on the determination that there was a ground for new trial as stipulated under Article 420 subparag. 5 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the said decision to commence a new trial became final and conclusive as is, on the grounds that the Emergency Measure No.9 was unconstitutional and

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts by Defendant 1.