The judgment below

Each of the Defendants’ non-guilty parts shall be reversed.

Each sentence shall be pronounced against the Defendants.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Of the judgment below, the Defendants’ act of exporting strategic items without permission of the Administrator of the Defense Acquisition Program Administration with regard to acquittal portion constitutes a single and continuous crime, and thus, constitutes an inclusive crime, and thus, the statute of limitations against the Defendants’ act cannot be deemed to have lapsed. However, the court below determined that each export of strategic items without export permission constitutes a separate crime, and that the statute of limitations has lapsed as to the above part, and sentenced the Defendants to be acquitted. The judgment below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to blanket crime, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. As to the Defendants’ assertion of misapprehension of the legal principles as to the acquitted portion of the judgment below, the Defendants did not know the fact that permission for export under the Foreign Trade Act is necessary in addition to permission under the Guns, Swords and Explosives Control Act (hereinafter “the Act”), and it merely constitutes a mere legal site. However, the lower court acquitted the Defendants of the violation of the Foreign Trade Act as stated in the annexed Table Nos. 2 through 12, on the ground that there is a justifiable reason to believe that the Defendants would not be a crime even if they export the small parts listed in the annexed Table No. 2 through 12 without any separate permission under the Foreign Trade Act. The lower court erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to legal errors, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. Judgment of the misapprehension of the legal principle as to acquittal portion 1) The summary of this part of the facts charged against the Defendants is as follows. The summary of this part of the facts charged is as follows: (a) Defendant A exported three parts of the small-scale J (TW 42 x 500 m in diameter) which is a military strategic item on December 11, 2006, with approximately KRW 450 U.S. dollars ($ 515,700 in Korea) on December 11, 2006, and exported