According to the provisions of paragraph 9 (k) of Article 22 of the Minutes of the Agreement on the Status of United States Armed Forces under Article 4 of the Korea-U.S. Defense Treaty, in any case in which the authority of the Republic of Korea makes a prosecution, it shall not appeal against the prosecution's conviction or the judgement of innocence: Provided, That the same shall not apply to the case of errors in the laws and regulations.

According to the provisions of paragraph 9 (k) of Article 22 of the Minutes of the Agreement on the Status of United States Armed Forces under Article 4 of the Korea-U.S. Defense Treaty, in any case in which the authority of the Republic of Korea makes a prosecution, it shall not appeal against the prosecution's conviction or the judgement of innocence: Provided, That this provision does not apply in the case of a mistake in the law, and it does not constitute an illegality such as violation of the rules of evidence

Article 22(9)(k) of the Agreed Minutes of the Agreement between the Republic of Korea and the United States of America regarding Facilities and Areas and the Status of United States Armed Forces in the Republic of Korea

Defendant

Prosecutor

Seoul Criminal District Court Decision 71No54 delivered on March 7, 1972, Seoul High Court Decision 71No54 delivered on March 7, 1972

The appeal is dismissed.

The prosecutor's grounds of appeal are examined.

According to the provisions of Article 22 (9) (k) of the Agreement under Article 4 of the Mutual Defense Treaty between the Republic of Korea and the United States of America regarding Facilities and Areas and the Status of United States Armed Forces in the Republic of Korea (hereinafter referred to as the “Agreement Minutes”), in any case, the Korean authorities are not guilty on the part of the prosecutor’s office or appeal against the judgment of innocence, but this provision does not apply to the case where the judgment of innocence is based on legal errors. The purport that the mistake in the Act is a mistake in the Act cannot be said to include the case of violation of the Act.

Since the issue refers to the violation of the rules of evidence or the violation of the law such as incomplete hearing, it shall not be deemed to fall under the case of a mistake in the law as set forth in the minutes of the above agreement, it shall not be justified to discuss the original decision that there is an error

Therefore, according to the opinion of all participating judges, it is decided in accordance with Articles 390 and 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Judge Do-dong (Presiding Judge) of the Supreme Court