A disposition to revert seized articles to the National Treasury by a prosecutor provided for in Article 12 of the National Security Act (Article 16 of the Anti-Public Law) shall not apply only to cases where the offender is not prosecuted, and it shall not apply to cases where the offender is prosecuted.

A disposition to revert seized articles to the national treasury by a prosecutor under Article 12 of the former National Security Act (Act No. 549 of Jun. 10, 600) shall apply only to cases where the offender is not prosecuted, and it shall not apply to cases where the prosecution is filed, regardless of the conclusion of the judgment.

Article 12 of the National Security Act, Article 16 of the Anti-Public Law, Article 215 of the Customs Act

Plaintiff

Korea

Busan District Court Decision 69Na415 delivered on April 2, 1970

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

The grounds of appeal by the defendant shall be examined.

However, Article 12 of the National Security Act (Article 16 of the Anti-Public Law) provides that a public prosecutor may order the forfeiture of seized documents or goods to the National Treasury even if the offender commits an offense under the same Act and receives remuneration therefor. Even if the offender does not prosecute the offender, the public prosecutor can order the forfeiture of seized goods to the State. This exceptional provision of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that even if the offender recognized that the offender committed an offense under the same Act and received remuneration, but does not bring an action for convenience, the seized goods may be reverted to the National Treasury. In a case where the public prosecutor prosecuteds the offender as an offense in violation of the same Act, it cannot be deemed that the legislative purpose of the above disposition to revert the seized goods to the National Treasury regardless of the result of the court's decision (if the court's decision of forfeiture has not been rendered). According to the facts established by the original judgment in this case, the plaintiff was not guilty but the court's decision was made without the declaration of forfeiture of the seized goods, and thus, there is no objection to the prosecutor's decision that the above disposition to revert to the National Treasury is unlawful.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge) Kim Young-chul Kim Young-ho (Presiding Judge)