[1] The applicable laws and regulations to determine whether the Republic of Korea is obligated to extradite a Japanese criminal

[2] The concept and type of "political crime" discussed in the extradition procedure, and the standard for determining which crime constitutes a political crime

[3] The meaning of "political crimes" under Article 3 of the Extradition Treaty between the Republic of Korea and Japan, and whether the so-called "political crimes" includes both (affirmative)

[4] In a case where the Japanese government's perception of the historical facts and affected the policies for internal and foreign countries related thereto, the case holding that the refusal of extradition is decided on the ground that the crime constitutes a "political crime" under the main sentence of Article 3 (c) of the above Treaty, which constitutes a relative political crime and constitutes a "political crime" under the main sentence of Article 3 (c) of the above Treaty, and that there is no other exception to the extradition of the criminal, and thus there is no other reason for exception to the extradition

[1] Since the extradition treaty between the Republic of Korea and Japan, which entered into force on April 8, 2002 and entered into force on June 21, 2002, has the same effect as the law, as a treaty ratified by the National Assembly, the extradition treaty is preferentially applied to the Extradition Act in accordance with the general principles of statutory interpretation, such as the principle of preference in the new law, the special law, and the purport of Article 3-2 of the Extradition Act when determining whether the Republic of Korea is obligated to extradite a criminal to Japan, and the extradition law, which is a crime, applies to the extradition treaty to the extent that it does not go against the purpose of the extradition treaty.

[2] According to today’s tendency, “political crime” in the extradition procedure can be divided into “dive political crime” or “net political crime”, which is solely against the political order of the pertinent country or infringes upon the power relations or organizations of the pertinent country without infringing upon private persons, private property or interests, and “ordinary political crime” which is one of the general crimes committed for such purpose. In this context, majority opinions agree that absolute political crime constitutes political crime. However, the standards for deeming relative political crime as a political crime have not yet been established internationally, leading to different practices among the states. In light of the concept and type of such political crime, the development process of the principle of non-delivery of political crime, and recent tendency, in particular, when determining whether a relative political crime is a political crime, (1) whether the motive of the crime agrees with or oppose the purpose of political organization or organization, (2) whether the political system of a country is intended to transfer or destroy the political crime, or (3) what is the main purpose of the crime is to realize the historical and objective of the crime, and (4) what is the important purpose of the political crime.

[3] In light of the similarity of the provisions of the Extradition Treaty between the Republic of Korea and Japan (hereinafter “Delivery Treaty”) and the Extradition Act, and the concept and type of political crime, the development process of the principle of non-delivery of political offenders and the recent tendency, and the criteria for determining political crimes, it is reasonable to interpret the term “political crime” in the main sentence of Article 3(c) of the Extradition Treaty as the same meaning as “a crime of a political nature or a crime related thereto” under Article 8(1) of the Extradition Act, and it is reasonable to interpret it as a concept that includes not only absolute political crimes but also relative political crimes.

[4] The case holding that in a case where the Japanese government's perception of past historical facts, such as the Japanese colonial army, and the Japanese government's request for extradition of a criminal detained in Korea under the Treaty on Extradition between the Republic of Korea and Japan for the purpose of resisting the Japanese government's perception of such historical facts and affecting the policies on internal and foreign affairs related thereto, the case holding that: (a) the motive for the crime is attributable to the perception of the past facts of the Japanese government and the labor union on policies related thereto; (b) the purpose of the crime is to pressure the criminal to change the Japanese government's policies in favor of the Japanese government or affect the policies on human life; (c) the new criminal is legally a religious organization's symbol, but there is no political risk equivalent to the facility of the Korean government; and (d) the fact that there is no possibility of political harm or harm between the Japanese government and the Japanese government's historical purpose and its related policies; and (e) the fact that there is no reason to view that there is no possibility that the most of the criminal's general criminal acts are more likely to harm or damage.

[1] Article 6 (1) of the Constitution of the Republic of Korea; Article 1 of the Extradition Treaty between the Republic of Korea and Japan; Article 3-2 of the Extradition Act / [2] Article 3 (c) of the Extradition Treaty between the Republic of Korea and Japan; Article 8 (1) of the Extradition Act / [3] Article 3 (c) of the Extradition Treaty between the Republic of Korea and Japan; Article 8 (1) of the Extradition Act / [4] Article 6 (1) of the Constitution of the Republic of Korea; Articles 2 (1), 3 (c) and (f), 4 (c), 8, 9, and 12 (1) of the Extradition Treaty between the Republic of Korea and Japan; Articles 3-2, 8 (1), 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15 of the Extradition Act; Article 167 (1) of the Criminal Act; Article 10 (1) of the Civil Act of the Republic of Korea

[2] Supreme Court Decision 84Do39 delivered on May 22, 1984 (Gong1984, 1163)

Criminal

Prosecutor of Seoul High Prosecutor's Office

Japan

Law Firm Sejong, Attorneys Seo-dong et al., Counsel for defendant-appellant

The extradition of a criminal to a requesting state shall not be permitted.

1. Summary of request for extradition review;

On November 8, 2012, the claimant filed a request for an extradition on May 21, 2012 against the criminal on the grounds that there was an extradition request from the requesting state on May 21, 2012, and concluded on April 8, 2002 between the Republic of Korea and the requesting state, and filed a request for an examination on whether to grant extradition permission pursuant to Articles 2 and 8 of the Extradition Treaty between the Republic of Korea and Japan (hereinafter “instant Treaty”).

2. Criminal facts subject to request for extradition review and applicable provisions;

A. Summary of the crime

On December 26, 2011, at around 03:56, the criminal destroyed part of the newspaper of the above company, which is managed by the head of the above new company, and caused public danger, such as the risk of burning the nearby structure, etc. in the above newspaper, before the Switzerland New company newspaper (the newspaper) located in Yoo-gu, Daejeon-gu, Daejeon-gu, 1 (1) 1 (1) (1) (No. 3 (1) (1) (1 (1) (1), the criminal committed the crime.

(b) Applicable law of request for extradition review;

The applicable law to the extradition review of this case provides that "the Extradition Act, which is a crime, has been promulgated and enforced on August 5, 198 as a domestic law, and is a treaty of this case," and the Constitution of the Republic of Korea provides that "any treaty concluded and promulgated by the Constitution and any generally accepted international law shall have the same effect as that of the domestic law" (Article 6 (1)). Under such constitutional provision, a treaty which requires consent of the National Assembly shall be construed as having the same effect as that of the law, and any treaty which does not require consent of the National Assembly shall be construed as having the same effect as that of the Presidential Decree. Thus, the treaty of this case shall be deemed to have the same effect as the treaty ratified by the National Assembly. In addition, according to Article 3-2 of the Extradition Act, the extradition treaty of this case shall be deemed to have the same effect as the law."

Therefore, in determining whether the Republic of Korea is obligated to extradite the criminal to the requesting state, the treaty of this case is applied preferentially to the extradition law in accordance with the general principles of interpretation of the law, such as the new law priority principle, the special law priority principle, and the purport of the above extradition law. The extradition law supplements the treaty of this case to the extent that it does not go against the purpose of the treaty of this case.

3. Determination as to whether extradition is granted

(a) Basic facts

The following facts are recognized by each statement and record in this Court of the criminal and witness except 1.

1) Family history of the criminal

In December 1985, the criminal was born at the upper family of China in 1974 and her parents were living away from his parents before entering the school, and even after her enrollment, she was living at the home of urine until her death in December 1985.

Before the death of the Republic of Korea, the following facts have been known to the criminal of his or her family and relatives throughout his or her life.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, as a Korean person, died of his mother and non-party 1, on the ground that he was living in Western, Daegu, and Seoul, and that he was led to China through the Bana Port around 1942. After the Second World War, he still remains in China, he was married to the outside and married the criminal, and that he was living in the middle school located in Seoul in the early 1940s on the ground that he was living in the Republic of Korea as a teacher of the middle school located in Seoul in the early 1940s.

On the other hand, non-party 4 of the criminal's claim was called as the leader of the New History-gun (Saman-gun) who was killed in combat and started a war of anti-Japanese in 1945, and was killed in the 1983.

For this reason, the criminal criticized the monarchism on the Internet, visited the Switzerland in 2005, and took an action to go against the Japanese colonial rule. In 2006, the respondent made a demonstration against the dispatch of the Switzerland by the Switzerland General in the 2006, and made a protest before the Embassy in the Republic of Korea.

2) Circumstances leading up to the instant crime

After the graduation of the university in 1997, the criminal was a English teacher at the Geman's educational institute in 1997, after studying psychology in 2007 and obtaining the qualification of a psychological clinic in 2008, the criminal started to work as a psychological clinic from 2008, and on March 11, 2011, the criminal went to the requesting state for psychological treatment for residents in the disaster area on October 3, 201.

While the Defendant was engaged in volunteer activities such as counseling treatment, etc. in the requesting state, on December 18, 201, the President of the Republic of Korea’s Egypted at the Korean ordinary meeting around the Korean ordinary day, despite the President of the Republic of Korea urged the applicant state to reply against the past sexual slavery issues, the Defendant’s debate itself is refused. Rather, the requesting state’s member demanded removal of sexual slavery sexual slavery sexual slavery for the Japanese Embassy before the Japanese Embassy in Korea. Moreover, the requesting state’s member took the form of collectively taking the Yoo’s personal history, thereby denying the historical facts of the past, and urged the requesting state to commit a crime against the true eating and drinking of the message that he/she seeks to return to the Republic of Korea by taking advantage of his/her anti-government policies, taking advantage of the fact that the latter victim, who was a descendant of the war victim, was fluened in a group of the second World War War.

Accordingly, the criminal selected at 4:0 a.m. at 4:0 p.m. on December 26, 201, the date of the crime of this case, which was the date of external shots sacrificeed to the Japanese militaryism, and the date of the crime of this case, which was set by December 26, 201, the date of which the China was established, as a new wall where there is less risk of human life damage. The time of the crime also includes “Sari-gun” in the “Sari-gun,” and the “Sari-gun,” which means the death of Japaneseism,” and the “Sari-si,” which means that the death of Japanese nationalism, was the same. After preparing the crime of this case, the criminal took his strings in preparation for the crime of this case, stating the process of the crime of this case, as well as taking his/her own form,

3) Execution of the instant crime

On December 26, 2011, at around 03:40, the criminal arrived at Yooman, approaching the central column of the newspaper of the above new history, and then spread 2-3 liters out of the gasoline 5 liters prepared in advance, and destroyed part of the newspaper of the above new history by putting them out as a barter at around 03:56 on the same day.

4) The target of the instant crime and the status of damage

On the other hand, the newspaper of Yoo-scoo National Assembly is about 27.5m wide, about 14m high, and the door is 2.9m high, 6.3m high, and both South and North Korean doors are installed in both sides of the Central Tribunal, one width is 2.1m high, and 4.9m high, respectively. In contact with the newspaper, four pillars of 1.2m high, about 11.5m high, 11.5m high (hereinafter referred to as the "Central Pcoo-coom pole") are installed in both sides of the original pole, respectively, and 0.8m high, 8.5m high, 4m high, and 12m high, are installed in the Central Pcoo-coo (hereinafter referred to as the "Central Pcoo-coom pole"), respectively. The two pillars in this case are two pillars of the Central Pcoo-coo-gu column.

In the instant case, the part of the contact between the original pole and each pole is 1cm wide, and the remaining part of the original pole is flicked within approximately 1cm wide and about 1cm high and 155cm high, and the part of the home located within the said original pole is flick within 2cm wide and 155cm high. The part of the home located within the said original pole is flick within 2cm high and 155cm high and is flick within 2.5cm wide and 15cm high and 15cm high. In the end, the part flicked is 4cm (125cm, 68.75cm, 15cm, 310cm high and 34cm high and 4cm high from the south part of the said original pole. In addition, the part flick is flick within the said 125cm and 4cm high and 155cm high.

There are 2 lots of buildings near the newspaper of this case. Among them, ridges (loak parties) located north are wooden buildings, which are wooden buildings and are 31.5 meters away from the point of origin of the wooden fence, and the office located south side of the newspaper of this case is reinforced concrete buildings and 35 meters away from the point of origin.

At night, 13 security guards who are the subject of the instant crime are in charge of the instant crime, and 2 security guards are in charge of the instant crime, making a tour of the Do newsletter or checking the inside and outside of the new company through the crime prevention camera as monitors at night. The inside and outside of the newspapers also have a boundary by means of a scoo, and human and material facilities are installed to promptly detect and extinguish a fire even if a fire occurs. In fact, immediately after the instant crime was committed, a fire was discovered by the scoo scoo that confirmed the monitors, and there was no damage to human life due to the instant crime.

5) The development situation after the instant crime

After committing the instant crime, the criminal revealed the details and sub-conference of the instant crime on the Internet Blogs. Of the content, the fact that “the fact that the instant newspaper is too large and thus, it is impossible to spread it to the extent that it would be 30 minutes or galle, which is close to 100liters. At this time, it is believed that the instant newspaper will lead to the following.”

In the initial investigation period, the Claimant’s investigation agency investigated the crime of this case as a case of causing the damage, and heard the opinion of the professor belonging to the Fire Research Center affiliated with the ASEAN University, Egyptian University on January 12, 2012. The gist of its opinion is that “The Claimant was independent of the crime of this case since the status of attachment on the part of the original pole and each pole is recognized, and the shotation is recognized on the bottom of the pole,” and that there is no possibility of spreading the relevant door due to the smoke effect that the ear’s situation is up to 1.5 meters high, and the wing part is formed, and that there is a possibility of spreading the said door, and that there is no possibility of burning the office or scarcity, etc., of the Claimant University.” Accordingly, the Claimant’s investigation agency conducted an investigation into the crime of this case, including the crime of this case, after the investigation into the actual situation on January 12, 2012 and the investigation into the accident of this case.

On the other hand, the criminal had been in the Republic of Korea immediately after the crime of this case was committed, and visited the Museum of Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, where the Magna, Daegu, etc., and the Magnasium died during his stay in the Republic of Korea. From 1992, the criminal convened an assembly on the sexual slavery issues in front of the Japanese Embassy in Korea every week since December 14, 201, even though the 190th Assembly was held on December 14, 201, and the government of the requesting state did not go against the Japanese legal tender issues, and tried to extinguish it by setting the accident against the requesting state on January 6, 2012, for the purpose of urging the government of the requesting state to reflect the historical facts of the past and to commit the crimes of reflect the true historical facts of the past.

On May 23, 2012, the criminal appealed after having been sentenced to imprisonment for ten months in the Seoul Central District Court due to the crime of attempted building or fire-prevention, etc., but the judgment became final and conclusive on August 31, 2012, and the execution of the sentence was completed on November 6, 2012.

On the other hand, on May 21, 2012, the requesting state filed a claim for extradition of the criminal pursuant to the treaty of this case while the crime of this case is an offense falling under Article 110(1) of the Criminal Act of the requesting state. The criminal is detained on the extradition arrest warrant issued as the crime of this case on November 6, 2012, and is currently in the Seoul detention center.

B. Whether the case constitutes an offence subject to extradition

According to the treaty of this case, the Parties have the obligation to deliver to the other Party the person discovered in their territory and claimed by the other Party for the indictment or judgment of the offence subject to extradition or for the execution of a sentence (Article 1). The offence subject to extradition is defined as a crime punishable by death penalty, imprisonment for life, or imprisonment for not less than one year (Article 2(1)) by the law of the Parties (Article 167(1)(the crime subject to extradition review of this case is punishable by imprisonment for not less than one year but not more than ten years pursuant to the law of the Parties. According to the records, the criminal facts subject to extradition review of this case can be acknowledged as a criminal who may be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and not more than ten years pursuant to Article 110(1)(other than buildings, etc.) of the Criminal Act of the requesting Party. On the other hand, the crime subject to extradition constitutes a crime subject to imprisonment for not less than one year pursuant to the treaty of this case.

C. The party's assertion on the grounds for non-delivery

The criminal and his defense counsel asserts that the crime subject to the extradition review of this case constitutes a political crime and thus the extradition of the criminal is not allowed under the treaty of this case. Even if it is not a political crime, this case constitutes a case where a request for extradition was made to prosecute and punish the criminal on the grounds of race, nationality, national origin, political opinion, or where there are reasonable grounds to recognize that the status of the criminal is infringed on such grounds, and that the extradition is not compatible with the humanitarian consideration due to the age, health or other personal circumstances of the criminal, and thus the extradition of the criminal should not be permitted.

As to this, the claimant asserts that the crime of this case is not accompanied by a situation of violent and political disturbance, such as war, revolution, disturbance, etc., and therefore, it cannot be viewed as a political crime since it is not an act of destroying political order or organization. It is not a political opinion of the criminal, but a criminal seek extradition to punish the criminal for the reason of fire prevention, and it is revealed that the criminal has a fluence as a result of an expert opinion, but it is not a case where extradition is compatible with humanitarian consideration.

(d) the relevant provisions;

The provisions pertaining to the instant case in the Convention are as follows.

The extradition of a person under this Treaty shall not be permitted in the following cases specified in Article 3 (Absolute Extradition) of the table contained in the text of this Treaty: (a) omitted; (b) omitted; (c) where the Requested Party considers that the offence for which extradition is requested was a political offence or that the extradition is conducted in order to prosecute, judge or punish a political offence; provided that the following offences are not, in itself, construed as a political offence; (i) murder or other intentional violent crimes or attempted crimes committed against him/her knowing that he/she is a head of a State or government of a Party or a member thereof; and (ii) the obligation of a Party to include in an extraditable offence pursuant to a multilateral international agreement to which both Parties are a party; (e) omitted; (f) omitted. If the Requested Party considers that a request for extradition was made to prosecute or punish the person for reasons of race, religion, nationality, national origin, political view, or gender or that the person’s status was infringed on, the person’s request for extradition is not compatible with any of the following circumstances:

The provisions pertaining to this case under the Extradition Act are as follows.

Article 8 (Refusal of Extradition in Cases of Crimes, etc. having Political Nature) (1) of the Table contained in the main text of the same Article, if an extraditable crime is of a political nature or is related to such a crime, the criminal shall not be extradited: Provided, That this shall not apply in any of the following cases:

E. Key issue of the instant case

Therefore, the issues of this case are as follows: 1) whether the crime subject to extradition of this case is a political criminal, which is an absolute reason for refusal of extradition under Article 3 (c) of the Treaty; 2) whether the extradition of this case is compatible with humanitarian consideration, which is an absolute reason for refusal of extradition under Article 3 (f) of the Treaty; 3) whether the extradition request was made to prosecute and punish a criminal on the ground of a political opinion, etc. of the criminal; 4 (c) whether the status of the criminal is infringed on such reason; and 4 (c) whether the extradition of this case is a relative reason for refusal of extradition under Article 4 (c) of the Treaty, which is a relative reason for refusal of extradition.

First, this paper examines the concept and type of political crimes, the development process of the principle of non-delivery of political offenders, recent tendency, criteria for judgment of political crimes, the meaning of political crimes under the treaty of this case, and whether the extradition crime of this case constitutes political crimes in the order of the first issue.

(f) the concept and type of political crimes;

International law scholars have tried to define the concept of political crime in the extradition procedure, such as “a crime that is anti-social or anti-public order and good morals, and thus constitutes an element established by the State. However, even if they oppose the person in charge of state power, it is a crime that is consistent with the majority of the people’s potential sense of justice or moral sentiment of some people,” or “any act that violates the penal law in a way other than a serious crime under ordinary law with the purpose of disturbing and destroying the basic political order of a particular state, or is “any act that is in violation of the penal law or is in danger of infringing on the legal interest of the State.”

However, even though the concept of political crime belongs to the most controversial concept among the legal areas, and the concept of political crime is more strongly than that of other crime groups internationally, it can be evaluated that the concept of political crime has not yet reached the definitions that can be recognized as a whole (Definition) regardless of the present and present efforts, such as the form of each country, the Constitution, and the governing structure, and the legal interests protected by the State or the interests.

According to today's tendency, political crimes can be divided into "a dynamic political crime" or "a fluent political crime" or "a fluent political crime", which is an act of opposing the political order of the country in question or infringing upon the power relations or organizations of the country in question without infringing any private person, private property or interests, and a general crime that is committed for the said purpose. Accordingly, according to theories, in the latter case, a single act is again divided into "combined political crime" that constitutes an act of infringing on political order and rights of an individual, and "a fluent political crime" that is an act of carrying out or facilitating absolute political crime or complex political crime that constitutes an act of infringing on the political order and rights of an individual, or "a fluent political crime" that is an act of committing an act of infringing on the protection of the person in question.

In this context, most of the opinions agree that absolute political crimes constitute political crimes, but since the criteria for deeming relative political crimes as political crimes have not yet been established internationally, they have developed different practices among countries. The positive laws of each country and extradition treaties concluded between countries do not define or unify the concept of political crimes and do not bind them, and have to flexibly cope with them according to the times and circumstances of extradition. Therefore, the legal judgment of the respondent regarding political crimes appearing in specific cases should reflect the legal point of view and the political system of that country. However, in the past, even though there are many opinions that relative political crimes are not included in political crimes, international criminal history is moving toward the direction of correcting them. In fact, the issue of applying the principle of non-delivery of political crimes, which is considered after the fact, is mostly a dispute over relative political crimes.

As the criteria for the determination of political crimes, the Anglo-American legal system adopted the incidental theory that generally supports the political disturbance and requires the formation of a part of the crime.In the continental legal system, it has been divided into the subjective element, the subjective element that only determines the objective element, the objective element that considers all the two. The representative theory is known as the incidental theory that determines the nature of a political crime as the motive of the criminal, the infringed right theory that determines the nature of an infringed right according to the nature of the infringed right, the common crime should be incidental to a political campaign, on the premise that the motive, purpose, and the situation in which the crime was committed is committed, considering the motive, purpose of the criminal and the situation in which the crime was committed, the nature of a political crime is superior.

However, there are many precedents that judge political crimes in the Anglo-American legal system, considering the concept of non-discrimination, necessity, proportionality and various circumstances, etc., and the countries that have withdrawn the infringed rights theory among the continental legal system also have adopted the standards close to the continental law theory in consideration of the seriousness of crimes, and the countries that have actually discontinued the requirements that the relevant ordinary crime should be accompanied by the political campaign, and then operate the system in the form of comprehensive consideration of the subjective and objective elements and all circumstances of the crime rather than the subjective and objective theory of pure meaning.

(g) The development process and recent tendency of the principle of non-delivery of political offenders;

Until today's age, the extradition system in the international community has been mainly focused on the extradition of political offenders between neighboring countries, but since the French Revolution in the 18th century, various political systems have emerged and modern human rights thoughts have developed. Since Belgium first introduced the non-humanity principle to the Extradition Act in 1834, most of the world over the world is entitled to protection by the non-humanity principle in cases where most of the countries are escape from other countries to commit political crimes and to escape prosecution in domestic law and treaties (see Supreme Court Decision 84Do39, May 22, 1984).

In the 20th century, the principle of non-delivery for political offenders has developed more in the process of the so-called East Western War, and in addition, the application has been expanded along with the development of the times of the situation such as the struggle of the North and South Korea, the deepening of inter-Korean issues, and the appearance of Islamicism countries.

The principle of non-delivery for political offenders is based on the belief that an individual has an innate right to appeal for political activities in order to promote political changes. As such, given that there are many cases where an ordinary criminal moves to a country with a political system consistent with his/her political objectives claimed by him/her, the extradition of the offender is unreasonable as a result of denying the value of the political order or system of the State against which the extradition is requested, and even if the State is a country with an order or system that does not coincide with the political objectives claimed by the State against which the extradition is requested, taking into account the fact that he/she is not involved in the domestic issues in international relations, and even if he/she is punished against a political offender, he/she cannot suppress the act subject to punishment as long as he/she has the nature of conviction.

However, the principle of non-delivery for political offenders is not absolute from its original point of view, but can be restricted by agreement between the parties to the extradition treaty, and in particular, with respect to certain types of crimes in recent years, it is obvious that the above principle is restricted through multilateral international treaties. The types of international crimes recognized as exceptions are listed as important crimes such as genocides, genocides, war crimes, piracy, aircraft hijacking, aircraft hijacking, art, personal trafficking, and other women and children's trade, international drug trafficking, adviser, and bomb terrorism.

On the other hand, there is a tendency to expand the scope of political crimes to which the principle of non-delivery of political offenders applies. In other words, the scope of recognition of political crimes is expanded by applying not only the political crimes subject to the non-delivery of political offenders, but also the persons subject to political gambling to those who are subject to the non-delivery of political offenders. In other words, there is a growing number of treaties or legislation stipulating the so-called "discrimination clause" that refuses to deliver in cases where the human rights protection is

H. Standard for determining political crimes

Considering the concept and type of such political crime, the development process of the principle of non-delivery of political offenders, and recent tendency, etc., in particular, in determining whether or not a relative political crime is a political offender, ① Whether or not the motive of the crime is consented or opposed to the purpose pursued by a political organization or organization, ② whether or not the political system of a country is intended to be transferred or destroyed, ③ whether or not to pressure or affect the change of major policies inside and outside the country, ③ the nature of the object of the crime, ④ what is the symbol of the crime, ④ what is the legal and actual nature of the crime, ⑤ what is the nature of the crime, ⑤ what is the relative nature of the crime, ③ whether or not there is a significant violence against human life, body, or freedom, and the importance of the result thereof, and whether or not there is a balance between infringement of legal interests and political purposes, and what is favorable or unfavorable to the criminal, and thus, the historical and objective of the crime is determined in light of the historical nature and objective of the crime, and the historical nature of the criminal claim and the reason of the political offense.

I. The meaning of "political crime" under the treaty of this case

In this case, Article 3 (c) of the Treaty provides that "where the respondent determines that the crime for which extradition is requested is a political crime, the grounds for absolute refusal of extradition shall not be permitted in accordance with this Treaty," and the provisions of Article 3 (c) of the Treaty stipulates that "where the respondent decides that the crime for which extradition is requested is a political crime, the grounds for the extradition of the offender shall not be permitted."

The Extradition Act also stipulates that “an offence with a political character or a crime related thereto” is not permitted to surrender the offender, but does not have any provision regarding the definition and scope of a political crime. Ultimately, the meaning and scope of a political crime should be reasonably interpreted by the respondent based on the respective provisions.

However, with respect to the form of the provisions of the instant treaty concerning the absolute grounds for refusal of extradition, first of all, the principle that the extradition of a criminal shall not be permitted for political crimes as set forth in the main sentence of Article 3 (c) is provided for in the proviso of the proviso of the same Article, where “the act of murder or other intentional violent crimes or punishment for the head of a State or government of a Party, or any person who knows that he or she is a member of such State or government,” and “an act of attempted crimes of which the Parties are obliged to be included in an offense subject to extradition by multilateral international agreements to which both Parties are both party,”

Meanwhile, as in the instant treaty, Article 8(1) of the Extradition Act provides that “in the event an extraditable crime is a crime of a political nature or is related thereto, no criminal shall be extradited.” In the proviso, the term “an offense of infringing or threatening the life or body of the head of the State, government, or his family”, “an offense of infringing or threatening the criminal under a multilateral treaty, for which the Republic of Korea exercises jurisdiction over the criminal or bears an obligation to extradite the criminal,” and “an offense of infringing, threatening, or threatening the life or body of many persons, or causing any danger to it,” is listed as an exception to the refusal of extradition.

In light of the concept and type of political crime as seen earlier, the development process of the principle of non-delivery of political offenders, the recent tendency, and the standard of judgment on political crimes, “political crime” referred to in the main sentence of Article 3(c) of the Treaty is the same as “a crime of a political nature or related crime” referred to in Article 8(1) of the Extradition Act, and it is reasonable to interpret the concept that includes not only absolute political crimes but also relative political crimes.

(j) Whether the extradition crime of this case is a political criminal

1) The factors to be considered.

First, it is clear that the crime subject to the extradition of this case is not solely against the political order of the country in question or infringing on the power relations or organizations of the country in question, but also has the character of a general crime. Therefore, it cannot be said that it is an absolute political crime.

Thus, the issue is whether the extradition crime of this case can be considered as a relative political crime, and in this regard, I will look at each of the factors presented in the judgment criteria of the political crime as mentioned above.

However, if discussions about political crimes have been relatively focused on acts that infringe on the order of a nation or change of political form, the conflict between the end of the 20th century and the end of the Eastern War has been relatively weak, while considering the historical and national conflicts that occur under the conditions of each country and the deepening situation of the times where the differentiation that is linked with the economic interests of each country has deepened, the act aimed at affecting the change of political crimes by opposing major policies taken by one country outside and outside the Republic of Korea has emerged as an important issue of the discussion on political crimes today.

In connection with this case, it is necessary to pay attention to the concept of generally presented or discussed in international precedents and theories with respect to past relative political crimes is not considering the difference of historical perception surrounding past historical facts, such as sexual slavery for the Japanese imperial army, which have been controversial in the East Asia, and the political situation such as the conflict of views surrounding the policies on the domestic and foreign countries related thereto.

From this point of view, it is necessary to consider the crime of this case as one of the important factors of judgment in discussing whether the crime of this case is an attempt to affect the political situation of the above North Asia unique to the East Asia and its related applicant's internal and external policies.

2) Necessity of organic consideration among the factors of determination

The object of the instant extradition review request is the objects owned by the religious corporation called Yoo-man, and it cannot be deemed that there was a direct infringement of national legal interests due to fire prevention.

However, in this case, it is important to understand why the criminal selected as the object of the crime rather than simply approach the crime, and why the motive or purpose of the crime is also the nature of the object of the crime. This is because, as seen earlier, the symbolic meaning of the object of the crime and the organic relation between the purpose of the crime and the crime is one of the factors to be considered in judging the political crime.

According to the records, the criminal committed the crime of this case by the requesting state government at the Korea Egyptian conference, which had been led to the Japanese War as a Korean national, and had been led to the Japanese War, and the Japanese military who participated in the Japanese War as well as the 14th class A offenders, and had been fryed in the Japanese War, and continued to be present at the requesting state's office, and the Japanese government made a consistent statement to the Japanese Embassy's name, which had been written in the name of the requesting state, for several years, on the one hand, that the Japanese government continued to be present at the requesting state's office, and had been present at the Korean Embassy for several years before the Japanese Embassy. However, the reason why the requesting state did not change the attitude of the requesting state government, and the reason why the crime was set to be established was that the Japanese government made a new statement to the Japanese Embassy, which had been written in the name of the requesting state, and that the Korean government made a consistent statement in the name of the requesting state, which had no change in the attitude of the requesting state.

At the time when the criminal became aware of the criminal's stay in the requesting state, the criminal stated that "Iskin Haskin Haskn Haskn Haskn Haskn Haskn Haskn Haskn Haskn Hask's Haskn Haskn's Haskn Haskn's Haskn's Haskn's Haskn's Haskn's Haskn's Haskn's Haskn's Haskn's Haskn's Haskn's Haskn'

3) Specific review

A) The historical meaning and background of sexual slavery for the Japanese army and Switzerland

Therefore, in order to clarify the meaning of the object, motive, and purpose of the instant crime, it is necessary to first consider the historical meaning and background of sexual slavery for the Japanese army and Switzerland. The record reveals the following facts.

(1) Regarding sexual slavery for the Japanese imperial army

(A) The meaning and historical background of sexual slavery for the Japanese imperial army

The sexual slavery for the Japanese army refers to women who were forced to engage in sexual acts for the Japanese military soldiers from the 1930s to the end of the Second World War in 1945, and thus have human rights.

At the time of the incident of rape by Japanese soldiers in 1932, the Japanese army established a so-called "comfort" as a precautionary measure against local people's anti-explosion and sexual illness, and started to set up a military prosecution in the occupied area. From July 1937 to China, the number of Japanese army was increased after the death of South and North Korean University on December 1937. Since 1941, the number of Japanese army was also established in the East Asia and the Pacific region in the Asia-Pacific War. The number of Japanese army army was estimated to be 80,000 to be 10,000 or 200,000,000 among them was presumed to be 80,000 women, and the remainder was 10,000,000 Korean War, China, China, and the Netherlands, and other women of the Republic of Korea.

(B) Submission of sexual slavery issues

On November 1, 1990, the Korean Council on Countermeasures against the Japanese Mental Health was established, and on August 1991, the Japanese sexual slavery victims drafted for the Japanese colonial army were raised in full-time through a public opinion session of sexual slavery victims drafted.

With respect to this, the government of the requesting state denied its responsibility, and made a statement suggesting that it recognizes sexual slaverys drafted for the Japanese imperial army as a "Sari-Sari" rather than a "Sari-Sari-Sari" group.

(C) the Round of the Secretary of the Republic of Korea;

On January 1, 1992, at the Library of the Defense Agency of the Japan National Defense Agency, the Japanese army directly participated in the conscription of the Japanese army, and the victim appeared, the requesting government started a fact-finding investigation. On August 4, 1993, the requesting government, directly or indirectly involved in the establishment, management, and transfer of the sexual slavery for the Japanese army. Although there are many cases where the Japanese army was requested by the military in relation to the recruitment of the Japanese army, there are many cases where the Japanese army was recruited against the will of the person himself, and more they directly participated in this case, the life in the above bill was recognized as being a harsh under the forced state, and it was announced that the essence of the problem was a serious infringement of human rights.

(D) Disputes surrounding the creation of the Asia Women's Development Fund

After that, on August 31, 1994, the Korean government made it clear that the compensation for sexual slavery victims drafted for the Japanese imperial army had already been resolved by the "Agreement on the Settlement of Disputes Concerning Property and Claims and Economic Cooperation between the Republic of Korea and Japan" (hereinafter "Korea-Japan Agreement"), and that it would seek the creation of the Asian Women Development Fund at a humanitarian level on a humanitarian basis.

In this regard, Korea and the Japanese sexual slavery victims and support organizations have expressed their opposing opinions on the activities of the Asian Women Development Fund, which were promoted under the premise that sexual slavery victims drafted for the Japanese colonial army were not entitled to legitimate compensation.

(e) Opinion differences between the Republic of Korea and the Requesting State.

The government of the Republic of Korea decided August 26, 2005 by the Public-Private Joint Committee of the Republic of Korea, the Han-day Agreement was intended to resolve the financial and private debt and debt relations between the two countries, and it stated that the "competence tort" in which state power such as the government of the requesting state was involved, such as the sexual slavery for the Japanese colonial army, cannot be seen as being resolved by the Han-day Agreement.

However, the requesting government denied the legal responsibility for the acts of the Japanese military in relation to the establishment and operation of the sexual slavery by asserting that the sexual slavery problems related to the Japanese colonial army have been completed through the discussion of the Minister of Labor, the resolution of legal problems through the Hann Agreement, the activities of the Asian Women's Development Fund, etc.

The sexual slavery victims drafted for the Japanese imperial army filed a lawsuit against the requesting state judicial branch since 1991 against the requesting state judicial branch, and most of them lost on the grounds of the extinguishment of the claim for compensation under the Korea-Japan Agreement, but on April 27, 1998, the branch of the Mapo-gu District District Court of the requesting state rendered compensation for damages by recognizing the legislative omission responsibility for the sexual slavery issues, and ordering the compensation for the damages. The victims were "the expression of a decent discrimination against women, the dignity of the women, the infringement of the dignity of the women, the violation of the people's dignity, and the infringement of fundamental human rights related to the core values specified in Article 13 of the Constitution of the requesting state."

On the other hand, the Constitutional Court of Korea held that the omission by the Government of the Republic of Korea, which did not settle a dispute in the interpretation of the interpretation between the two countries as to whether the sexual slavery victims drafted for the Japanese colonial army had the right to claim compensation against the requesting state has infringed on the important constitutional rights of the said victims (Supreme Court en banc Decision 2006Hun-Ma788 Decided August 30, 201).

(f)Entry of international organizations;

The UN Human Rights Sub-Committee has been carrying out continuous research activities on the sexual slavery issues for the Japanese imperial army. In the report prepared on January 4, 1996 by the Cubas special reporting officer in accordance with the Resolution 1994/45 of the Human Rights Committee, it confirmed that the Japanese military in the second World War should be legally responsible for the establishment of the above-mentioned system as a violation of international law, and suggested six recommendations that the requesting government should take legal responsibility, such as compensation for damages at the national level, disclosure of relevant data in custody, official intention, revision of textbooks, punishment of responsible persons, etc., on April 196, the above report was adopted by the UN Human Rights Committee.

In addition, on August 12, 1998, the UN Human Rights Subcommittee adopted the report of the special reporting officer. The report emphasizes that the legal liability of the requesting government should be recognized for the sexual slavery drafted drafted for the Japanese imperial army and that the compensation of the requesting government should be paid promptly with respect to the punishment of the persons responsible for the installation of the above report, who were forced to put into a sexually old position in the above-mentioned suit, in which the "Rape Center (Rape)" can be held.

On the other hand, on June 12, 2008, the UN Human Rights Council regularly adopted a working group report containing recommendations and inquiries from each country on sexual slavery issues for the Japanese imperial army, and on October 30, 2008, the UN Human Rights Council announced the review report related to the human rights of the requesting state in Geneva on October 30, 2008, and recommended the requesting state government to commit private crimes in the form of recognizing the legal responsibility of sexual slavery issues and accepting many victims.

(G) The attitude of international community

On July 30, 2007, sexual assault, etc. brought about a group rape, forced miscarriage, sense of shame, physical cutting, death, and suicide by the government of the requesting state, and the textbooks newly introduced to the requesting state are one of the most human trafficking crimes of the 20th century which do not have precedents in terms of cruelness and scale, and are reduced in the war crimes of the requesting state at the time of the second World War, including the depression of the Japanese War, and the administration of the requesting state is trying to deny or dilution the discourse of the Japanese President for the recent public and private reason, and ① the requesting state government should adopt the Japanese government and the Pacific system from the 1930s to the 2nd World War, from the 1930s to the 2nd World War, and to the 2nd World War, the Japanese government should make public notification to the Japanese government and the Japanese government should make public notification to the Japanese sexual assault and the Japanese government's present domestic society's present sexual assault resolution.

After that, on November 8, 2007, a resolution was adopted on the official history and the recognition of historical and legal responsibilities, victims' compensation, and forced mobilization of sexual slavery for the Japanese imperial army with respect to the requesting state government, on December 13, 2007, which included 200,000 or more women who forced the mobilization of sexual slavery into the Japanese colonial army.

(2) As to Boscoo

(A) At the time of 1869, 1869, Mascoo had been built under the direction of Mascoo for the purpose of Mascoo-gun's Mascoo-gun's Mascoo's Mascoo-gun's Mascoo-gun's Mascoo-gun's Mascoo-gun's Mascoo's Mascoo-si's Mascoo's Mascoo-si's Mascoo's Mascoo-si's Mascoo-si's Mascoo's Mascoo-si's Mascoo's Mascoo-si's Mascoo-si's Mascoo's Mascoo's Mascoo's Mascoo's Mascoo's Mascoo-do.

(B) In 1879, the title of “the State is to be biased” was changed to a scooman’s name to the scooman’s name to the effect that “the State is to be biased,” and the status of a believers was granted to a person who was in a special position of a believers who was in a special position to directly participate in the YY and who was in charge of the 1877 year and who was in charge of the scoo’s scoo as a new company in charge of the scoo’s scoo and the scoo’s scoo in a scooman’s scoo and the scoo’s scoo in a scoo, a new company in charge of the scoo’s scoo and scoo’s scoo, a new company with high shooting, and the scook and the scoo in a scoo.

(C) At the early stage, Switzerland Co., Ltd.: (a) went through the Cheongil War and the Russian War, and went together with the soldiers and soldiers who died in the external war; (b) served as a military religious facility for the purpose of suppressing and punishing soldiers who were killed in action in the course of combating and booming the Republic of Korea only and serving as soldiers who were killed in action in the military; and (c) served as a military religious facility for the purpose of combating soldiers, such as combat and punishing soldiers who were killed in action against the war; (d) after the era of the 2nd World War, Switzerland moved to the general public with the exception of yellow or yellow leg; and (e) was killed in action with the special treatment of those killed in action as the Decree of Hocheon; and (e) was killed in action with the special treatment of those killed in action at that time; and (e) was de facto sculing the status of those killed in action to the general public through the North Korean War; and (e) had been released from the North Korean War’s reputation and the North Korean War.

(D) Even after the second World War II, the applicant state's welfare in the co-ownership of the scooman, in cooperation with the Dodernization, made the "Scooman's name tag" or the "Scoo's identity card, etc." of the sub-scoo, and sent the scoo's name tag to the scoo's name tag or the "Scoo's identity" of the sub-scoo, and the scoo was combined on the basis thereof.

On October 17, 1978, 14 former Class A offenders, such as the Dohaki, etc., were in combination with the Ynaman. Here, the former Class A offender committed an external crime leading the requesting state, and the latter part of the crime means a person who was convicted of a crime falling under “a crime against peace, namely, a crime against peace, a propaganda accusation, or an unprovened war, a plan for planning, preparation, commencement, or execution of a war, or a joint plan for accomplishing any act against international law, treaties, agreements, or regulations, or a joint mother,” as stipulated in Article 5 of the Ordinance of the International Military Court of Korea, which was established by the requesting state in order to judge the war crime of the requesting state.

In addition, the Switzerland's history is combined with 210,000 Korean nationals who were mobilized to the foreign war of aggression in Japan and the 2,460,000 people who were killed in the Requesting State due to Japanese soldiers or military service. At present, 2,460,000 people were jointly killed in the same time. Only the soldiers, military personnel, and quasi-military service were killed in the war, and the general citizens who died in the same way, who were killed in the military service, and were killed in the military service. The number of soldiers killed in the Korean War of Japan related to the Japanese War of War, such as the Japanese War, the Russian War, the Man-Pacific War, the Japanese War, the Pacific War, and the Pacific War, among those killed in the Korean War, occupy 2,450,00 people.

(E) In December 1945, the Union Chief Headquarters (GH Q/SCAP) which controlled the requesting state after the completion of the second World War, ordered the abolition of national confidence and the strict separation of political relations by announcing the “case concerning the guarantee, support, preservation, supervision, and abolition of the government’s guarantee, support, supervision, and publicity of national confidence and believers” (so-called “Sabababababababababababababababababs). The provision on the separation of political relations in the constitution of the requesting state, which was enforced in 1947, is against the fact that there were various harms such as the flababababababababababababababababababababababababa, and thus, the militaryism does not arrive again.

(F) On February 2, 1946, all the laws and regulations related to the believers were repealed, and the national prestige was extinguished by the system, and under the Religious Corporation Ordinance enforced on the same day, Switzerland lost its national character and changed its status as a religious corporation. However, even after the previous years, Switzerland still maintained its previous status in terms of the relationship with the bereaved family members, and was not affiliated with the new copy office (new copy office) newly established differently from other new companies, and did not completely lose the function of the State’s facilities for drilling. In addition, as for the previous previous years, it took charge of the function of educational facilities for cultivating pride and patriotism as Japan.

(G) As the East Western War was scood in September 1951 and the rule of occupation has been terminated and the strict control policies on believers and believers have been gradually mitigated, the Welfare Federation of Japan’s Bereaved Family Council (the subsequent revision to the Japanese survivor Association) established a policy that requires the former scoo in 1952 to provide assistance to the government for the exercise of the above scoo’s scoo as a national expense. After that, Japan’s Bereaved Family Council, including the Japan’s Bereaved Family Council, and other Postal Organizations, the movement requiring a new scoo’s film as the center of the Japan’s Bereaved Family Council was scood. Accordingly, since 1969, two new scoodians passed the National Assembly to recover the public relations with the State, but the previous scoodscoo failed to submit the legislative proposal to the National Assembly for the reason that the new scoodscoo was not the core of the State’s religious separation of society.

(h) On the other hand, 1975, 1975, 190, 1999, 1999, 1999, 200, 200, 2009, 200, 2000, 2000, 2000,0000, 2000,000,0000,0000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,0000,000,000,0000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00,00,00,00.

(i) After the establishment of a modern state, the Switzerland War Museum, which is the main body of the United States Armed Forces and its affiliated facilities, has been displayed various weapons such as the eastaki's statues of the modern Japanese Army, Round combat machine, tank, engine gun, and the special large-scale war of the war box, such as the Kakakra's flag, the Gakman's flag and relics, military brus and remains, military brus and military brus, military brus, military brus and the pictures of the war dead by the requesting state. Since the establishment of a modern state, various war relics and photographs of the war dead and the war dead are displayed. The explanation and interpretation of the brusity of each war are described.

(j) The neighboring countries, including the Republic of Korea and China, where the Republic of Korea and China had been affected by the invasion of the Republic of Korea and China surrounding the ship of the Switzerland of the requesting state, have been a symbol of the facilities or militaryism in which the Switzerland, where the first class A crime was jointly committed, took place a strong action against the said believers, and some of the bereaved families of the Korean Wared in the Republic of Korea, which were combined with the said believers, filed a lawsuit against the said believers to revoke the said believers. While the requesting state takes the view that the Republic of Korea had the function of the public prosecution facilities of the national state as a religious juristic person after the Switzerland had been previous, the government or the political parties continued to join the ship as seen above for various political purposes, and in relation thereto, there is a conflict of opinion against the latter within the requesting state.

B) The nature of the motive and purpose of the crime

Considering the historical meaning and background of the sexual slavery crime as seen earlier, the nature of the sexual slavery and family history of the criminal committed in the Republic of Korea before and after the crime of this case, the situation that the criminal was not the Republic of Korea immediately after the crime of this case, and the content and consistency of the statement made in the case of the Japanese Embassy's existing structure or fire prevention attempts in this court, and the criminal's crime of this case appears to be a means to urge the requesting government to change its historical facts and policies, such as the sexual slavery of the Japanese government, and to present the message thereof, and to bring about domestic and overseas public opinion. The criminal should be aware of the historical facts of the past crime of this case to be committed in accordance with its own political purpose in the Republic of Korea, including the fact that it was committed before and after the Japanese Embassy's previous election campaign, and that the criminal was committed in the same manner as that of the Japanese Embassy's previous election campaign, and that there was a series of historical motive and objective of the criminal act of this case to be seen as one of its own political purposes.

Therefore, this is the political purpose of political crime.

C) The nature of the crime and the relationship between the crime and the purpose

However, the crime committed for political purposes cannot be regarded as a political crime. This is because it is a matter of determining which the nature as a general crime and the political character are more important by comprehensively balancing subjective and objective evaluation factors as seen earlier.

From this point of view, considering the nature of the subject of the instant crime, the status and role of the second World War II of Switzerland, the current status and role of the ABD, even after the second World War, the attempt was continued to keep the Switzerland under the control of the state in the requesting state even after the second World War, and the fact that the political parties continued to have been engaged in such activities as the fee of the requesting state and the fee of the government in response to the opposition of the neighboring countries in the Switzerland and the past political situation so far, it can be evaluated that the Switzerland is a private religious facility under the law, but in fact, there is a political symbol corresponding to the state facilities.

In light of the fact that the criminal is regarded as a symbol of political order that justifys the past war of aggression rather than a private religious facility, and it is clear that the criminal committed the crime of this case. In light of the fact that the Republic of Korea and China and the surrounding countries of the requesting state such as the Republic of Korea and China have strongly resisted and reflected each time of the scooman's participation in the scoo, it is recognized that the view that the scoo has a political symbol equivalent to the national facility is not an individual's own opinion, but a broad consensus is formed in neighboring countries, including the Republic of Korea.

Next, the relationship between crime and purpose is examined as to the relationship between crime and crime. Until now, there was a demonstration demanding changes in the policies for the sexual slavery of the requesting state prior to the Japanese Embassy, but there was no particular response in the requesting state, and the criminal's statement to the effect that the motive and purpose of the crime of this case was widely spread through the media, etc., and the focus was on the interest of surrounding countries, including the requesting state, after committing the crime of this case, the perception of past historical facts, such as the sexual slavery of the requesting state, by the Japanese government, and the fact that the requesting state and the people were aware that the sexual slavery of the sexual slavery of the requesting state, and related policies and friendly trends were experienced, and in light of the nature and origin of the Japanese history, the crime of this case seems to have been significantly achieved political purposes that the requesting state and the people had sought by selecting the requesting state on the subject of the fire prevention of this case. Accordingly, the crime of this case can be acknowledged as having close relation to the political purpose and purpose of this case.

D) The nature of the crime and the balance between the purpose intended.

The crime of this case constitutes a crime of fire prevention to general goods under Article 167(1) of the Korean Criminal Act, and constitutes specific dangerous crimes that can be punished for public danger.

앞서 살펴본 바와 같이 이 사건 범행 대상인 신문이 건조물이 아닌 일반물건으로서 방화 당시는 인적이 드문 새벽녘이었고 야스쿠니 신사는 보안 경비가 삼엄하여 화재가 발생하더라도 즉시 진화될 수 있는 인적·물적 설비가 갖추어져 있는 것으로 보이고 실제로도 이 사건 방화 직후 바로 야스쿠니 신사 경비원에 의하여 즉시 발견되어 바로 소화되기에 이른 점, 이 사건 방화로 인한 피해는 물적인 피해뿐이고 그 피해 또한 크지 않은 것으로 보이는 점, 비록 이 사건 신문이 전소하여 주위 건조물에 연소된다고 하더라도 이 사건 신문의 규모에 비추어 실제로 이 사건 신문이 전소하기에 걸릴 시간은 적지 않으리라 보이고 그 후 주위 건조물에 연소되기까지도 상당한 시간이 걸릴 것으로 예상되는데 앞서 본 보안 경계의 정도에 비추어 그 전에 화재가 진압될 가능성이 큰 점, 청구국 수사기관도 수사 초기에는 이 사건 범행을 기물손괴 피의사건으로 의율하기도 했던 점, 이 사건 신문과 중앙문 원기둥 지주의 크기 및 규모와 실제 불에 탄 면적, 범행 당시 이번에는 흔적만 남기기로 하겠다는 범죄인의 의도, 이 사건 신문과 주위 건조물 사이의 거리 등에 비추어 볼 때, 비록 이 사건 방화로 일부 재산 피해가 생겼고 주위 건조물에의 연소 가능성 및 그로 말미암은 공공의 위험이 발생되었다고 하더라도, 그 재산 피해, 연소 가능성 및 공공의 위험의 정도는 그리 크지 않은 것으로 보인다.

Therefore, the crime of this case is a crime that intrudes or threatens many unspecified persons' lives and bodies or causes danger to them, and cannot be evaluated as a cruel act that loses the balance between the political objectives pursued by the criminal.

E) Relation to the purpose of the non-delivery principle for political offenders

In relation to the purpose of the principle of non-delivery of political offenders, this case is examined. Among the Republic of Korea (the same position as China, which is a country of nationality of a criminal) and the requesting state, there has been a conflict of political views in terms of perception of past historical facts, such as sexual slavery for the Japanese army, awareness of the past policies related thereto, and the response thereto, etc., and there have been a conflict of political opinions in the requesting state.

In light of the motive and purpose of the crime of this case, the perception of past historical facts, such as sexual slavery issues for the Japanese imperial army, and the criminal’s opinion on the respondent’s policies related thereto is recognized as sharing the common value and tracing of the Republic of Korea’s constitutional ideology, international organizations such as the United Nations, etc., or most literary countries.

In this respect, transferring a criminal to a requesting state would deny the political order of the Republic of Korea, the constitutional ideology, and the universal value of the most literacy countries, and thus does not comply with the purport of the principle of non-delivery of political offenders as seen earlier. Moreover, as long as there is a difference and conflict of opinion as seen earlier in the requesting state, the transfer of a political criminal to a requesting state may not be desirable in international relations because it may interfere with political issues in the requesting state.

F) Sub-decisions

As above, ① The motive of the crime was due to the perception of historical facts in the past, including the sexual slavery of the requesting state, and the policy related thereto, and there is no motive for the criminal to gain personal benefits from the crime of this case. ② The purpose of the crime is to change the political belief of the requesting state, the sexual slavery for the Japanese army, etc., or to pressure the criminal to exercise its influence, and the opinion of past historical facts, such as the political belief and sexual slavery for the Japanese imperial army, cannot be said to be the exclusive opinion of the criminal, and it is consistent with the view that formation of a broad consensus and consent can be obtained in the international community as well as China, which is the country of nationality of the Republic of Korea, and it is hard to conclude that the new criminal is legally property of the requesting state, but it is difficult to view that the previous criminal who was convicted of having led the external aggression of the requesting state, which is the subject of the crime of this case, has a considerable impact on the political motive of the requesting state, which is the object of the crime of this case.

In full view of such circumstances and the purport of the principle of non-delivery of criminals, the historical background between Japan and the Requested State, and the Republic of Korea, which is the State of nationality of the criminal, the Republic of Korea, and the Republic of Korea, which is the State of nationality of the criminal, the difference in perception of past historical facts and the conflict of views, and the universal values pursued by most of the international organizations and countries including the United Nations. The crime subject to extradition of this case is a relative political crime with the nature of a general crime with a more political character than that of a general crime, which is a crime committed for the purpose of resisting awareness of past historical facts, such as the sexual slavery of the Requesting State, and affecting the domestic and foreign policies related thereto. This constitutes a "political crime" as defined in the main sentence of Article 3 (c) of the Treaty.

4. Conclusion

Thus, the crime subject to extradition of this case is a political crime, and there is no other exception to the extradition of a criminal. Thus, as to the remaining issues, the extradition of this case is decided as ordered by the decision not to permit the extradition of a criminal to the requesting state under Article 3 (c) of the Treaty without requiring further review.

Judges Hwang Han-sik (Presiding Judge)