The case not falling under Article 5 (2) of the National Security Act (Article 5 (1) of the Anti-Public Law) (Article 5 (2) of the Anti-Public Law)

If it is evident that the father of the defendant, who is a Korean national living in Japan, has sent to the defendant with his work, not by writing, it does not constitute a crime of receiving money and valuables under the National Security Law, if it is evident that the father of the defendant, who is a Korean national living in Japan, was born to the defendant.

Article 5 of the National Security Act, Article 5 of the Anti-Public Law

Supreme Court Decision 68Do754 delivered on July 30, 1968 (Kakadd 3447, Supreme Court Decision 16B-50, Decision summary Article 52(11)1257 of the Criminal Act)

Defendant

Defendant

Busan District Court (74Da279)

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four years and four years in suspension of execution.

One hundred and seventy-five days of detention days prior to the declaration of the original judgment shall be included in the above imprisonment.

130,000 won shall be additionally collected from the defendant.

Of the facts charged, it is not guilty that 300,000 won was received from Nonindicted Party 1, who was sent to the police officer on June 1973, 8-19, 196, 30,000.

The summary of the grounds for appeal by the defendant's defense counsel (private ships and ships) is as follows: first, the defendant did not commit any crime listed in the indictment of this case, and the defendant did not actually exist and the non-indicted 1 or the non-indicted 2, which the court below stated that the defendant would not pose a threat to the defendant's adviser or adviser until the prosecutor's investigation was conducted by the judicial police officers. Based on this, the court below found the defendant guilty of all of the facts charged of this case without any evidence, which caused the violation of the rules of evidence and the misconception of facts, thereby affecting the judgment; second, even if the court below committed such crime, it is unfair because the sentence against the defendant is too too large to determine the punishment of the defendant; second, it will first be examined from the point of misconception of facts.

First of all, according to the prosecutor's statement on the facts constituting the crime as stated in 1-7 of the prosecution, and each protocol of interrogation of the suspect against the defendant prepared by the prosecutor, it is evident that the defendant made a statement by making the above facts of the crime in a minor confession. On the contrary, there is no evidence to deem that the defendant made the above statements or made a threat to the investigator's unconstitutional adviser's adviser or adviser, and there is no evidence to deem that the defendant made the above statements or made the prosecutor's strict questioning because he could not cope with the prosecutor's strict questioning. On the other hand, the court below determined that the court below erred in the facts of the above facts of the crime by comparing the facts of the defendant's violation of the rules of evidence on the grounds that the non-indicted 2 was used in Japan's name prior to several years by making a notice of the data obtained with regard to the defendant's preparation of the Busan District Security Register (No. 140 of the record).

그러나 검사의 공소 제8기재 범죄사실에 대하여 보건대 피고인의 원당심 법정에서의 진술이나 원심증인 공소외 3, 당심증인 공소외 4의 각 증언에 의하여 이 사건 문제의 일본돈 30만엔은 앞서의 조총련 공작원 공소외 1이 공소장 기재와 같은 공작금으로 보낸 것이 아니고 일본국 오오사까시 히가시요 도가와구 시모진죠쪼 (이하 생략)에 사는 재일동포인 피고인의 아버지 공소외 5(당58세)가 피고인에게 생활비에 보태어 쓰라고 보낸 것임이 너무나 명백하게 인정되고 이에 반하는 검사작성의 피고인에 대한 피의자신문조서 기재나 피고인 작성의 자술서 기재부분은 위 각 증거에 비추어 믿을 수 없고 달리 반대되는 증거가 없고 보면 결국 검사의 이 부분에 대한 공소사실은 그 증명이 없음에 돌아간다 할 것이어서 무죄를 선고하여야 할 것임에도 불구하고 원심이 그에 이르지 않고 이점에 대하여서까지 유죄로 인정처단한 것은 필경 사실을 오인함으로서 판결결과에 영향을 미친 위법을 저지른 것이 되므로 다른 나머지 항소이유에 대한 판단에 나아갈 것 없이 원심판결은 이점에서 파기될 수 밖에 없다. 따라서 당원은 피고인의 이 사건 항소를 이유있는 것으로 받아들여 형사소송법 제364조 6항 에 따라 원심판결을 파기하고 다시 판결하기로 한다.

Criminal facts and evidence recognized in the trial of the political party are identical to criminal facts entered in the judgment of the court below and their respective visual evidences except for the attitude of the writing of each written statement on the defendant's preparation, and thus, they are cited as they are in accordance with Article 369 of the same Act.

Article 6(4) of the National Security Act provides that one of the above-mentioned crimes shall be included in the first five-year imprisonment with prison labor; Article 5(1) of the same Act provides that two-year imprisonment with prison labor shall be included in the first five-year imprisonment with prison labor; Article 5(1) of the same Act provides that two-year imprisonment with prison labor shall be included in the first five-year imprisonment with prison labor; Article 6(1) of the same Act provides that two-year imprisonment with prison labor shall be included in the first five-year imprisonment with prison labor; Article 5(1) of the same Act provides that two-year imprisonment with prison labor shall be included in the first five-year imprisonment with prison labor; Article 5(1) of the same Act provides that two-year imprisonment with prison labor shall be included in the first five-year imprisonment with prison labor; Article 50 of the same Act provides that two-year imprisonment with prison labor with prison labor; Article 50 of the same Act provides that two-year imprisonment with prison labor and five-year imprisonment with prison labor shall be punished; Article 5(1) of the same Act provides that three-year imprisonment with prison labor.

The summary of the facts charged by the prosecutor in the 8th of June, 1973 is that "the defendant received money and valuables from the non-indicted 6 in the Republic of Korea who returned to the Republic of Korea at the port located in the city of Jung-gu, Busan, Jung-gu, Busan, with the knowledge of the fact that the non-indicted 1 sent 300,000 United Nations to the public money and received money from the non-indicted 1, who knowingly received money from the non-indicted 1 in the Republic of Korea, from the non-indicted 6 in the middle-gu, Jung-gu, Busan." The defendant is not guilty in accordance with Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, since there

It is so decided as per Disposition with the above reasons.

Judges Choi Jin-ro (Presiding Judge) Lee Ma-ho