[1] Whether the National Security Act is unconstitutional (negative)

[2] Whether North Korea is an anti-government organization (affirmative)

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

[4] Requirements for establishing a conspiracy relationship in a conspiracy of co-principal

[5] The case where the person was punished as a co-principal of a crime of interference with the inspection of the body of a deceased person

[1] The principle of international peace and peaceful unification declared by the Constitution in light of its full text and Articles 4 and 5 is premised on the premise that it does not harm the provisional order of free democracy. Thus, in the situation where it is clear that there is no clear sign that North Korea has given up the waiver of the fundamental order of free democracy in our society with a military force, and it threatens our democratic fundamental order, it cannot be deemed as a violation of the National Security Act, the purpose of which is to secure national security, survival and freedom of citizens by regulating anti-state activities that may endanger the national security, and it cannot be deemed that the concept of the elements of each crime under the National Security Act, which is reasonably interpreted in light of its purpose, violates the fundamental contents of the principle of no punishment without law, since the concept of the elements of the National Security Act, which is provided by the National Security Act, is ambiguous and broad, cannot be deemed as violating the fundamental rights of our Constitution, but it does not infringe upon the basic rights of our society, the freedom of conscience, freedom of press and publication, etc., and it cannot be deemed that the legislative purpose and rights are limited within the limit.

[2] Even if it is obvious that North Korea has become a threat to the fundamental order of our liberal democracy, North Korea has joined the United Nations simultaneously, and as a result, North Korea has obtained approval as a sovereign state in the international community, and North Korea has signed a written agreement on the reconciliation, infinite and exchange between South and North Korea, North Korea cannot be deemed as an anti-government organization under the National Security Act.

[3] The case holding that "the fifth Korean Warman" is an organization whose purpose is to praise, encourage, promote, and aid and coordinate the activities of the North Korean War Group, which is an anti-government organization

[4] In relation to accomplices who are jointly engaged in a crime by more than two persons, the conspiracy does not require any legal penalty, but is only a combination of two or more persons' intent to jointly process a crime and realize a crime. Thus, even if there is no agreement between the two or more persons, the conspiracy relationship is established if the two or more persons' intent is formed by mutual agreement, and even if they did not participate directly in the act of execution, they are held liable as co-principals for the other persons' acts.

[5] The case holding that where the defendant, the president of the Korea-style Institute, led by the defendant, issued a condition of the demand for the police and decided that the defendant would not comply with the request of the National Standing Committee, but did not accept such conditions, and the president of the Korea-style Institute, the president of the Korea-style Institute, et al. did not report to the defendant and did an act of interference with the physical examination in accordance with the above policies, the defendant shall be punished as co-principals of interference with the physical examination

[1] Article 7 of the National Security Act/ [2] Article 2 of the National Security Act/ [3] Article 7 (3) of the National Security Act/ [4] Article 30 of the Criminal Act/ [5] Article 30 of the Criminal Act

[1] Supreme Court Decision 93Do1730 delivered on September 28, 1993 (Gong1993Ha, 308), Supreme Court Decision 96Do2673 delivered on December 23, 1996 (Gong1997Sang, 583) / [1] Supreme Court Decision 96Do2696 delivered on May 16, 1997 (Gong1997Sang, 1802 delivered on July 16, 1997) 97Do97985 delivered on September 16, 1997 (Gong1997Ha, 2243 delivered on July 25, 197), Supreme Court Decision 97Do1939 delivered on July 29, 197 (Gong1997Ha, 297Ha, 2775 delivered on July 29, 195)

Defendant

Defendant

Attorney Lee Young-he et al.

Gwangju High Court Decision 97No680 delivered on April 29, 1998

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

The Defendant and the public defender’s grounds of appeal (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed) are examined together.

1. As to each violation of the National Security Act

The principle of international peace and peaceful unification under Articles 4 and 5 of the Constitution is premised on the premise that it does not undermine the fundamental order of free democracy. Thus, in the situation where there is no clear indication that North Korea has given up the fundamental order of free democracy in our society with a strong military force, and it is clear that there is a threat to our fundamental order, it cannot be deemed that the National Security Act for the purpose of securing the security and survival and freedom of the people by regulating anti-state activities that may endanger the national security is in violation of the Constitution. The concept of the elements of each crime under the National Security Act, which is reasonably interpreted in light of the purpose of the Act, violates the fundamental contents of the principle of no punishment without the law. The freedom of conscience, freedom of press and publication, etc. are fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution of the Republic of Korea, but there is no restriction, and it cannot be deemed that it does not infringe upon the fundamental freedom and rights of the State within the limit of 97,97.97 Supreme Court en banc Decision 96Do97969, Jun. 16, 19797.

In addition, even though North Korea joined the United Nations at the same time under clear circumstances that North Korea is threatening to the fundamental order of our liberal democracy, and as a result, North Korea has obtained approval from the international community as a sovereign country, and North Korea has signed a written agreement on the reconciliation, infertility and exchange between South and North Korea, North Korea cannot be deemed an anti-government organization under the National Security Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 96Do1817, Feb. 28, 1997; 96Do2673, Dec. 23, 1996; 95Do1624, Sept. 26, 1995; 94Do930, May 24, 1994; 93Do1730, Sept. 28, 1993).

원심판결 이유에 의하면 원심은 제1심판결을 인용하여, 한국대학총학생회연합(약칭 한총련)은 1987.에 출범한 전국대학생대표자협의회(약칭 전대협)의 협의체적 한계를 극복하고 강력한 중앙지도력의 구축과 전국적인 집행체계 확보를 위하여 1993. 4. '조국의 자주화', '사회의 민주화' 등을 내용으로 하는 강령과 대의원대회를 최고의결기구로 하고 그 밑에 상임의사결정기구로 중앙위원회, 상설의결기구로 중앙상임위원회, 그 밑에 집행기구로 의장과 사무처, 중앙집행위원회, 정책위원회, 조직위원회, 연대사업위원회, 중앙집행국을 두고, 특별기구로 조국통일위원회, 학원자주화추진위원회, 대변인, 그 밖에 상설적 정책협의기구로 정책협의회, 상무집행위원회 등의 중앙조직과 서울 등 9개 지역별 총련, 25개 지구별 총련 등의 지역조직을 두는 등의 내용으로 된 규약을 채택하고 1993. 5. 고려대학교에서 제1기 한총련 출범식을 개최함으로써 구성된 대학생들의 단체로서 1993.에 구성된 제1기 한총련으로부터 1996.에 구성된 제4기 한총련에 이르기까지 통일문제와 관련하여 반국가단체인 북한이 대한민국을 와해시키기 위하여 선전·선동활동의 일환으로 내세우고 있는 대남적화통일노선의 주장과 궤를 같이 하는 내용으로 우리 사회를 '미제국주의 강점에서 비롯된 식민지 반자본주의 사회'로 규정하고, 미국에 대하여는 '분단을 조장하고 고착시킨 원흉'이라고 비난하면서 소위 주적으로 간주하고, 투쟁목표를 '남한 사회를 뒤집어 엎고 새로운 사회제도를 수립하여 민족의 자주성을 완전히 실현'하는 데 두고 있을 뿐 아니라 노동자, 농민, 청년학생을 주력군으로, 도시빈민, 중소자본가 등을 보조역량으로 규정하는 반면에 '미제국주의와 그 앞잡이인 매판자본가, 지주, 반동관료' 등을 타도 대상으로 삼고, 연방제 통일방안이 유일하고 가장 타당한 통일방안이라면서 주한미군 철수, 팀스피리트 훈련 중지, 국가보안법 폐지, 북미평화협정 체결 등을 주장하는 등 북한의 대남적화통일노선을 추종하고 있다는 사실, 피고인은 그와 같은 사실을 잘 알면서 1996. 11. 13. 대학교 총학생회장으로 선출된 후 같은 해 12.경 제4기 한총련 중앙상임위원회의 간부인선추천을 받아 이를 승낙하고, 1997. 1. 15.경 고려대 조치원 캠퍼스에서 개최된 제5기 한총련 임시중앙상임위원회에서 그 자리에 참석한 각 지역총련 임시의장 전원의 만장일치로 제5기 한총련 임시의장으로 선출되었으며, 같은 해 1. 20. 한양대학교 학생회관 2층 회의실에서 한총련 임시의장 자격으로 국내 언론사 기자 30여 명이 참석한 자리에서 '5기 한총련 임시체계 구성과 임시의장 선출 과정' 등의 문건을 통하여 제5기 한총련은 제4기 한총련이 1996년에 벌여왔던 투쟁을 이어받아 국가보안법 철폐, 안기부와 기무사 해체, 안기부법과 노동법 날치기 통과 반대 규탄 투쟁 등 모든 계기와 공간을 반김영삼 투쟁으로 모아 들어가 김영삼 정권을 타도하고 민주정권을 수립할 것이며, 북미간의 평화협정체결을 적극 추동해 들어가고, 그와 더불어 조국통일의 여건을 마련하는 투쟁, 연방제 통일을 더욱 널리 선전하는 투쟁을 적극적으로 벌일 것임을 천명하고, 그 후 같은 해 2. 22.까지 제5기 한총련 간선간부의 인선작업을 완료한 후 같은 날 서울시립대에서 각 대학교 총학생회장들이 참석한 가운데 피고인 주최로 개최된 제5기 한총련 중앙위원회에서 간선간부들의 인준식을 마침으로써 제5기 한총련 조직체계를 구성하고, 위 제5기 한총련 중앙위원회에서 위와 유사한 내용의 제5기 한총련 규약 개정안, 총노선 등을 토론하고, 대의원대회 소집공고, 중앙위 결의문, 특별결의문 채택 등으로 회의를 진행하고, 같은 해 4. 4.부터 같은 달 6.까지 전남대학교 체육관에서 한총련 의장단, 집행부 대의원 등 1,300여 명의 한총련 대의원들과 일반 학생들이 참가한 가운데 제5기 한총련 대의원대회를 개최하여 제5기 한총련 의장으로 정식 선출되고, 제5기 한총련의 조국통일위원장에 이준구, 학원자주화추진위원장에 김진영, 대변인에 정영훈을 각 인준받고, 피고인의 주도로 한총련 중앙위원회, 조국통일위원회 등 집행부에서 제작·배포한 '5기 한총련 정기 대의원대회' 제하의 자료집을 통하여 다시 위와 같은 내용으로 북한공산집단의 대남적화혁명 논리에 따라 남한이 미제의 식민지라는 정세인식 하에 선 미제축출, 후 파쇼타도라는 전술에 의거, 한국사회의 모든 모순은 '미제와 파쇼' 대 민중의 구도로 설정하고 반미·반파쇼투쟁이 핵심 투쟁목표임을 거듭 천명하면서 통일투쟁과 관련하여 연방제 통일과 그 기반조성을 위한 국가보안법 철폐, 안기부 해체, 주한미군 철수 등을 선전·선동하는 등 기본노선 및 골격에 있어서 종전의 북한의 대남적화통일노선에 부합하는 투쟁목표 및 노선을 근간으로 하는 규약 개정안과 1997년 사업계획 등을 통과시키고, 같은 해 6. 5. 서울대학교에서 위 대의원대회의 결의에 따라 피고인의 주도로 제5기 한총련 출범선언대회를 개최한 사실 등을 인정한 다음, 그 인정 사실에 의하면 '제5기 한총련'은 반국가단체인 북한공산집단의 활동을 찬양·고무·선전하며 이에 동조하는 행위를 목적으로 하는 단체이고, 피고인은 국가의 존립·안전이나 자유민주적 기본질서를 위태롭게 한다는 정을 알면서도 제5기 한총련의 의장으로서 이를 구성하였다고 판단하였는바, 기록과 대조하여 검토하여 보면 원심의 위와 같은 사실인정 및 판단은 정당하고, 거기에 상고이유로 주장하는 바와 같은 사실오인이나 법리오해 등의 위법이 있다고 할 수 없다 (대법원 1998. 5. 15. 선고 98도495 판결 참조).

In addition, even if the first or fourth class training prior to the defendant being in charge of the president's position did not have been determined as a dual organization under the National Security Act even once, and the crime of forming a dual organization under the National Security Act has not been applied to the president of the former Korean War. On the other hand, even if the court below first applied the crime of forming a dual organization under the National Security Act to the defendant among the president of the Korean War, the court below cannot be deemed to have applied the arbitrary legal application against the right to equality guaranteed by the Constitution as long as the fifth class training first fell under a dual organization under the National Security Act. In addition, according to the records, it can be seen that the president, executive officers, and representatives of the Korean class training were replaced every year for a term of one year, and all of them were being employed separately for each class, and the defendant and the public defender can not be seen as constituting each of the above organizations in consideration of the composition and tendency of the executive officers.

2. As to each special obstruction of performance of official duties, injury resulting from special obstruction of official duties, violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, and violation of the Assembly and Demonstration Act

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, in light of the motive, purpose, means, and method of each assembly and demonstration which a defendant participated or held, the court below's judgment is just in light of the records, and compared with the records, it is obvious that each assembly and demonstration which the defendant participated or held is obviously a direct threat to public safety and order due to collective assault and threat as provided by Article 5 (1) 2 of the Assembly and Demonstration Act. According to the provisions of Article 18 (1) 1 and (2) of the same Act, the chief of the police station having jurisdiction over such assembly and demonstration may order dissolution of the assembly and order, and the participant shall immediately leave the assembly and demonstration after such order is issued. The police officer's duty to dissolve such unlawful demonstration itself is an unlawful exercise of public authority and it cannot be viewed as a legitimate act to interfere with the suppression of it. There is no reason for the public defender to this point.

In addition, the crime of violation of the Punishment of Violence, etc. Act against the defendant is about the defendant's act of infringing upon the police's pool school by force (2. k. 3 of the judgment of the court of first instance) from the deaf nature of the tobacco chain meeting of Korea on August 15, 1996. According to the records, the court below's fact-finding on this point is just and there is no error in the law. There is no reason for the discussion of the public defender on this point.

In regard to the violation of the Assembly and Demonstration Act against the defendant, since each assembly or demonstration that the defendant participated or held falls under an obvious threat to public safety and order due to collective assault or threat as provided by Article 5 (1) 2 of the same Act, even though the place of the assembly or demonstration is within the premises of a university, it may not be exempted from the application of Article 19 (4) or (2) of the same Act. There is no reason for the public defender to discuss this issue.

3. As to the interference with the autopsy of the body of a person

In relation to co-offenders who are jointly engaged in a crime, the conspiracy does not require any legal punishment, but is a combination of two or more persons to jointly process a crime and realize a crime. Even if it is impliedly, if there is a combination of intentions with several persons, the conspiracy relationship is established if two or more persons intend to realize a crime. As long as such conspiracy was made, a person who does not directly participate in the act of the conspiracy is held liable for criminal liability as a co-principal against the act of the other persons (see Supreme Court Decision 98Do30, Mar. 27, 1998).

According to the records, during the process of the demonstration by students from the Joseon University on March 20, 197, those students were first used by them, and they were deceased and immediately removed from the above hospital room. After that, the total number of students of the Joseon University and the South Guns (non-indicted 1, who are co-offenders in the above facts charged, is the total number of students of the Joseon University and the South Guns), etc. were under the real control of students and were found to have died during the demonstration, and the defendant was not aware of the fact that the defendant was unable to conduct the autopsy on the premise that the above condition was met, i.e., the non-indicted 1’s temporary inspection for the investigation of truth, CTgraph, 34, and 144, and the defendant was not aware of the fact that the defendant was unable to conduct the autopsy on the premise that the defendant did not respond to the above condition, i.e., the defendant's final inspection on the body of the Korean National Police University.

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

5. Therefore, the appeal shall be dismissed, and part of the detention days after the appeal shall be included in the original sentence. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Final Young-young (Presiding Justice)