beta
Text
All appeals are dismissed.
Reasons
The grounds of appeal are examined.
1. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment on the grounds of appeal by the Defendant in light of the relevant legal principles and the evidence duly admitted, the lower court is justifiable to have found the Defendant guilty of general traffic obstruction among the facts charged in the instant case on
In so doing, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence and violating the Constitution and international norms, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine
2. In order to recognize the prosecutor’s grounds for appeal as a pro rata expressive material under the National Security Act, the content of the expressive material must be active and aggressive to threaten the nation’s existence and security and fundamental democratic order, which is a legal interest in the protection of the National Security Act. Whether the expressive material has an objection to the existence of such objection should be determined not only by the overall contents of the expressive material, but also by taking into account the motive for, and the motive for, making the expressive act, matters related to the external appearance
Meanwhile, the crime of Article 7(5) of the National Security Act is a so-called crime of manufacturing, importing, copying, transporting, distributing, selling or acquiring documents, drawings and other expressive materials for the purpose of committing the act of immigration as provided in Articles 1, 3, and 4.
The purpose in the objective crime is to establish an excessive subjective illegal element for the establishment of a crime, which is separately required, and therefore, an actor was aware of the nature of representations and engaged in the conduct prescribed in paragraph 5.
Even if the purpose of transfer is not recognized, the composition requirement is not satisfied.
In addition, since the prosecutor bears the burden of proof of the facts constituting the elements of the crime prosecuted in the criminal trial, the prosecutor must prove that the objective of the act was to be transferred to the actor.