Inasmuch as a person who has lost the position of the chief of a trade union does not transfer the official seal, etc. of the branch, the act of newly rejecting it and the act of forging a private person (negative)

Since a person who has lost the position of the head of a trade union due to the invalidation of an election does not hand over the partnership branch and the head of that branch to the acting person for the head of that branch, the act of excluding the head of that branch and the head of that branch under the approval of the acting person for the head of that branch with a view to using the documents of that branch for response shall not be deemed to be a forgery of official seal, etc.

Article 239 of the Criminal Act

Defendant 1 and two others

Attorney Cho Jae-sik (Law Firm Jin-bok) (Attorney Cho Jae-sik) (Attorney Cho Jae-sik) (Attorney Cho Jae-soo) (Attorney Kim Jae-soo) (Attorney Kim Jae-soo) (Attorney Kim Jae-soo) (Attorney Kim Jae-soo) (Attorney Park Jae-soo)

Military Court Decision 80 High Court Decision 249 delivered on January 24, 1981

The part of the judgment below dismissing Defendant 1’s appeal shall be reversed, and that part of the case shall be transferred to the Seoul High Court.

All appeals by Defendant 2 and 3 are dismissed.

The number of detention days after an appeal shall be 50 days in each original sentence of defendant 2 and 3.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to Defendant 1’s appeal

(1) The purpose of the judgment of the court below is to determine that the defendant is highly likely to be elected if he is elected directly by the head of the mobilization, labor union and coordination branch.

A. At around 16:00 on August 7, 1979, the seal 16:00, in each of the seals stamped near the Rouridong-dong Seoul, the main seal of which is "the head of the Republic of Korea Mining and Trade Union mobilization branch and the head of the Nationwide Mining and Trade Union mobilization unit."

B. At that time, the first instance court's decision that had Nonindicted Party 1 give pressure to the request for approval of the straight line for the election of the head of a chapter made in the name of Dong and the letter of approval for appointment of the election management members, and that, in fact, it would have been sent to the mobilization labor union branch with the approval of Nonindicted Party 2 by the chairman of the Korean Mine Labor Management Committee, and that it would have been used after reaching the vision.

② The judgment of the court of first instance, which was ordered by the court below, became final and conclusive on the grounds that the defendant, who was the head of the former branch, was elected as a result of the election of the head of the branch, which was conducted on April 3, 1979 at the branch of the Korea Mining Trade Union, but in conflict with the election but was brought to the Korea Mining Trade Union for the reason that the defendant, who was in conflict with the former branch, participated in the election, the above mine trade union, which received the objection to invalidity of the election, was brought to the Korea Mining Trade Union upon questioning by the Korea Labor Union, was decided on May 8 of the same year after the response to questioning by the Korea Labor Union, and at the same time, was appointed as the representative of the above branch, the chief of the regional mining union division, the Lee-young-young as the provisional measure on July 18 of the same year.

(whether it is reasonable to appoint the president as above under the rules of the National Mining Trade Union or not, there is no material to record whether it is reasonable to appoint the president as above.

In addition, according to the records, Nonindicted 3, who was elected as the above head of the above branch, was clearly aware that he refused to hand over the head of the branch and the head of the branch to a person who was appointed as acting as the head of the branch, and he was in his custody. Meanwhile, the defendant, after the above decision was made to invalidate the election, submitted a letter of recommendation to direct election of the head of the branch to the mine union union in order to submit the letter of recommendation that the head of the branch and the head of the branch in the above mobilization sub-branch to the above sub-branch to the above sub-chapter 2, the chairperson of the sub-chapter 2, and the head of the branch and the head of the branch in the above sub-chapter 4, with the approval of Nonindicted 4, at the time of the above sub-chapter 4, for the purpose of using the above sub-chapter 4 in the documents of the sub-chapter

Therefore, there is no evidence suggesting that the principal branch and the head of the branch have been dismissed in order to use them for the activities of the Trade Union and Labor Relations Adjustment Group as a countermeasure against Nonindicted 3’s refusal to transfer his official seal, etc., and contrary to this, there is no evidence suggesting that the Defendant had an intent to forge or exercise the official seal, etc. in order to disguise the legitimate seal in an unlawful

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the crime of forging seals and uttering, which led to failure to exhaust all necessary deliberations or maintaining the judgment of the court of first instance which pronounced facts without evidence. Since it is clear that the judgment of the court of first instance, which maintained the judgment of the court of first instance, which was sentenced to concurrent crimes with other crimes, affected the conclusion of the judgment dismissing the defendant's appeal, the judgment of the court below shall not be reversed without

2. As to Defendant 2’s appeal

① Examining records, the Defendant’s participation in illegal assemblies and collective demonstrations as stated in the judgment of the first instance court, and acceptable the fact that he participated in the requirements, and the evidence preparation that was completed in the process of fact-finding cannot be found to be erroneous, but the judgment that maintained the judgment of the first instance court is justified, and therefore, the argument about this point is without merit.

② Even when emergency martial law was rescinded, the punishment of an act violating the declaration of the martial law commander during the enforcement of martial law does not affect all the punishment of the act of violating the declaration of martial law. Therefore, the theory of demanding the same declaration of martial law as the abolition of the sentence cannot be adopted.

3. As to Defendant 3’s appeal

① According to the records, the court below's decision that maintained it is just in the process of evidence preparation, and there is no error of law as to the illegal assembly, collective demonstration, requirements and injury (violation of the Act on the Punishment of Violences, etc.) in the judgment of the court of first instance.

(2) Punishment for any violation against the capture of martial law during the enforcement of emergency martial law shall be as explained in the above 2-2.

For the same reason, the judgment of the court below against Defendant 1 is reversed, and the part of the case is to be transferred to the Seoul High Court pursuant to Article 23 of the Martial Law Act, and the appeal by Defendant 2 and 3 is without merit. Accordingly, all of the appeals are dismissed, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges who decide to add part of the number of days of confinement at the

Justices Jeon Soo-hee (Presiding Justice)