[1] The case holding that "Ulsan University Innovation Committee" is a dual organization under Article 7 (3) of the National Security Act

[2] The requirements and criteria for determining pro-enemy contents under the National Security Act

[3] The case holding that pro-enemy contents are recognized under the National Security Act

[1] The case holding that "Ulsan University Innovation Committee" is a dual organization under Article 7 (3) of the National Security Act

[2] To be recognized as pro-enemy contents under the National Security Act, the contents of the expressive materials must be active and aggressive to threaten the existence and stability of the Republic of Korea and the free democracy system, which are the legal interests protected under the National Security Act. Whether the expressive materials have the same nature should be determined by taking into account not only the overall contents of the expressive materials, but also all the circumstances such as the motive for production, the form of the expressive act itself and its external contents, and the situation at the

[3] The case holding that pro-enemy contents are recognized under the National Security Act

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

[1] Supreme Court Decision 99Do1976 delivered on July 23, 1999, Supreme Court Decision 99Do1975 delivered on September 3, 199 / [2] Supreme Court Decision 96Do1817 delivered on February 28, 1997 (Gong1997Sang, 1026), Supreme Court Decision 96Do2606 delivered on June 13, 1997 (Gong1997Ha, 2093), Supreme Court Decision 97Do2084 delivered on November 25, 1997 (Gong198Sang, 175), Supreme Court Decision 95Do117 delivered on March 13, 198 (Gong198Sang, 198Sang, 111398Do3979 delivered on September 39, 199)

Defendant

Defendant

Busan High Court Decision 99No649 delivered on November 3, 1999

The appeal is dismissed. 65 days out of detention days after the appeal shall be included in the original sentence.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

1. As to the violation of the National Security Act regarding the composition of the pro rata organization

In light of the records, the fact-finding and decision of the court below to the same purport is justified, and there is no error in the misapprehension of the rules of evidence or the misapprehension of the legal principles as to Article 7 (3) and (1) of the National Security Act, as otherwise alleged in the ground of appeal. The court below did not err in the misapprehension of the legal principles as to the unit innovation committee of the Ulsan National University Innovation Committee.

2. As to the violation of the National Security Act against the distribution of pro-enemy contents

In order to be recognized as pro-enemy contents under the National Security Act, the contents of the expressive materials must be active and aggressive to threaten the existence and stability of the Republic of Korea and the free democracy system, which are protected legal interests under the National Security Act. Whether the expressive materials have such an objection should be determined by taking into account not only the overall contents of the expressive materials, but also all the circumstances such as the motive for the production thereof, the form of the expressive act itself and its external contents, and the circumstances at the time of the expressive act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 9Do2437, Oct. 8,

Examining the evidence admitted by the court below in light of the records, it is sufficiently recognized that the defendant has distributed computer diskettes kept in the title of "the principal ideology of this case", "the main idea of our political party and several problems in the inside and outside policies of the Government of the Republic of Korea", "the nationalism must be well known", and the contents of each of the representations of this case are praise and salivating the principal idea, and it cannot be found that the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the existence and suitability of free democracy or attack of the Republic of Korea, such as the violation of the rules of evidence, such as the violation of the rule of origin and attack of the Republic of Korea, and the violation of the rule of evidence, such as the violation of the rule of origin of the non-state's military power and the rule of consciousness against the Republic of Korea.

3. 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 on the bench.

Justices Lee Han-gu (Presiding Justice)