[1] The case holding that "the fifth Korean Warmen" is a dual organization

[2] Whether Article 7 (3) of the National Security Act is unconstitutional (negative)

[1] The case affirming the judgment of the court below which held that "the fifth Korean War Institute" cannot be viewed as a political organization in which students' pure meaning was gathered, and it is a political organization claiming the present political power's ties and the federal unification plan, and it is an anti-government organization's adoption of violent revolution routes consistent with the North Korean unification routes, which are anti-government organizations, with the purpose of praise, encouraging, promoting, and aiding and abetting its activities, and it is a dual organization under Article 7 of the National Security Act.

[2] The so-called dual organization under Article 7 (3) of the National Security Act refers to an organization whose purpose is to praise, instigate, promote, or aid, or instigate the activities of anti-government organizations or their members or those who received an order on the premise of existence of an anti-government organization under Article 2 of the National Security Act, or directly and indirectly promote and instigate the national defense, under the premise of existence of an anti-government organization. This interpretation has been reasonably interpreted in accordance with the legislative intent of the National Security Act, and thus is not unconstitutional.

[1] Article 7 (3) of the National Security Act / [2] Article 7 (3) of the National Security Act

[2] Supreme Court Decision 94Do1813 delivered on May 12, 1995 (Gong1995Sang, 2149), Supreme Court Decision 96Do2673 delivered on December 23, 1996 (Gong1997Sang, 583), Supreme Court Decision 96Do2696 delivered on May 16, 1997 (Gong197Sang, 1802), Supreme Court en banc Decision 97Do985 delivered on July 16, 1997 (Gong197Ha, 2243), Supreme Court Decision 97Do1836 delivered on July 25, 197 (Gong197Ha, 275)

Defendant

Defendant

Law Firm Gangseo-dong General Law Office, Attorneys Park Jung-chul et al.

Seoul High Court Decision 97No2836 delivered on February 4, 1998

The appeal is dismissed. 80 days out of detention days after the appeal shall be included in the original sentence.

Each ground of appeal by the defendant, the deceased and the state appointed defense counsel shall be examined together.

1. The court below held the first five-year unification council of South and North Korea as the 5th president of the Korean National Security Association, and held the first five-year unification council of South and North Korea, and held the first five-year president of the Korean National Security Council and the first five-year president of the Korean National Assembly with the knowledge of the fact that the 197th president of the Korean National Security Council was the first five-year president of the Korean National Assembly and the first five-year president of the Korean National Assembly, and held the first five-year president of the Korean National Assembly, and held the first five-year president of the Korean National Assembly and the first five-year president of the Korean National Assembly and approved the first five-year president of the Korean National Assembly as the first five-year president of the Korean National Assembly. The court below held the first five-year unification council of North Korea as the first five-year president of the Korean National Assembly, and held the first five-year president of the Korean National Assembly, the first five-year president of the Korean National Assembly and the first executive branch of the Korean National Assembly, which were the first executive Council of North Korea's.

In light of the records, the above fact-finding and judgment of the court below are considered correct, and there is no error of law such as misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles as alleged in the grounds of appeal.

In addition, the so-called "foreign organization" under Article 7 (3) of the National Security Act refers to an organization with the primary objective of praiseing, encouraging, promoting, or aiding the activities of anti-government organizations or their members or those who received orders on the premise of the existence of an anti-government organization under Article 2 of the National Security Act, or directly and indirectly promoting or inciting the activities of anti-government organizations or their members or those who received orders, or promoting or inciting the national defense (see Supreme Court Decision 94Do1813, May 12, 1995). This interpretation has been reasonably interpreted in accordance with the legislative intent of the National Security Act, and thus it cannot be deemed as unconstitutional, and the court below also considered to have recognized the "five-year comprehensive training" in accordance with such legal principles as an anti-government organization. Thus, the argument in the other grounds of appeal cannot be accepted.

2. In this case where a sentence of less than 10 years of imprisonment is imposed, the argument that the sentence of the court below is too excessive cannot be a legitimate ground for appeal.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and part of the number of days pending trial after the appeal is to be included in the principal sentence. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Chocheon-sung (Presiding Justice)