(a) Whether it becomes a State secret subject to the crime of espionage under the National Security Act, if it becomes favorable materials for North Korea even if it is known in Korea (affirmative);

(b) The starting point for the statute of limitations for the crime of forming an anti-government organization under the National Security Act, which includes that he/she joined an anti-government organization and engaged in guiding

(a) If any material is favorable for North Korea even after being reported to a newspaper, radio, etc. in Korea, it shall be a State secret which becomes the object of a crime of espionage under the National Security Act;

B. In a case where the defendant joined the Korea War Veterans Association around May 1955 and joined the Korea War Veterans Association as a member of the Korea War Veterans Association around April 1961, it is obvious that the defendant had been engaged in the guiding duty, and the so-called "the defendant already met the elements of the crime of forming an anti-government organization under the National Security Act". Thus, the period of prescription of this crime is the starting point.

(a) Article 4(1)2 of the National Security Act, Article 98 of the Criminal Act, Article 3(1)2 of the National Security Act, Article 252(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

A. Supreme Court Decision 90Do646 delivered on June 8, 1990 (Gong1990, 1500) 90Do1285 delivered on August 24, 1990 (Gong1990, 2054). Supreme Court en banc Decision 4293Do57 delivered on April 5, 1960 (Noh845 delivered on October 5, 1961) 4294Do208 delivered on October 24, 1970 (Noh18Do860 delivered on November 24, 1970)

Defendant 1 and one other

Defendants and Prosecutor

Attorney Yoon-chul et al.

Seoul High Court Decision 90No2810 delivered on November 23, 1990

All appeals are dismissed.

One hundred five days, out of the days of detention pending trial after appeal, shall be included in the principal sentence of Defendant 1.

1. The grounds of appeal by Defendant 1 and his defense counsel are summarized as follows.

(1) The part of the statute of limitations expired, such as joining Non-Indicted. 1 in Mana Labor Party and receiving money from Mana and engaging in espionage activities by Defendant 2, is only a false statement made by Defendant 1 at the end of detention life for a long time. Defendant 1 did not enter or join a labor party, nor did he participated in it, and Defendant 2 did not think that Defendant 2 was a male Manasor, but did not think that she was a male Manasor, and did not think that she was a male Manasor, and did not think that she was a male Manasor, and did not participate in a large economic assistance, and the contents of the conversation were also distorted in terms of marriage, graduation, graduation, etc., and even if it was not an act to receive order from or receive from a member of an anti-government organization, the court below acknowledged the facts in violation of the rules of evidence, or did not err by evidence, but did not err by misapprehending the legal principles as a counter-espionage under the National Security Act.

First, according to the evidence adopted by the court of first instance as cited by the court below, the facts constituting a crime against Defendant 1 can be acknowledged, and there is no violation of the rules of evidence such as theory of lawsuit, or any violation of the facts not based on evidence. Thus, the grounds of appeal are without merit. The following grounds of appeal are without merit: (a) it should be interpreted that public information is a state secret subject to the crime of counter-espionage under the National Security Act if it becomes favorable material for North Korea even if it is reported to the public health department, domestic newspapers, radio stations, etc., and public information is made in favor of North Korea; and (b) therefore, the public information is not confidential and it is not a detection

2. The grounds of appeal by the defendant 2 and his defense counsel are summarized as three as follows.

(1) On February 16, 1975, when the Kim Jong-il was designated as a legal holiday, the relationship with North Korea was cut down after that day, and Nonindicted Party 1 was moved to another organization by Nonindicted Party 2, and the counter-espionage activity was suspended. Even though the facts charged after February 1975 were all of the facts charged, there was no evidence evidence, the court below erred in the facts contrary to the rules of evidence. (2) The prosecutorial records also do not contain any difference between the prosecutor's transfer of the case from the safety planning division and the defendant 2 at the same time, without the notice of the right to refuse to make statements, and without the opportunity to make statements and without the notice of the right to refuse to make statements, and thus, the confession in the prosecutorial office was made by changing the written opinion of the safety planning division to the location of deception and intimidation, and thus, the confession in the prosecutorial office is not reliable, and even if there is no credibility, the confession in the prosecutorial office's confession of Defendant 2 was found to be guilty of all the facts charged.

First of all, according to the evidence of the first instance court's decision as cited by the court below, the facts constituting the crime against Defendant 2 can be acknowledged, and there is no erroneous error in finding the facts contrary to the rules of evidence, and the arguments are without merit. As to the grounds of appeal (2) as to the grounds of appeal, it is not reasonable to conclude that Defendant 2 had a reason to suspect that the confession statement made by the prosecutor was made in the way as pointed out in the arguments, or that it was not made arbitrarily by means of deception, intimidation, meeting, etc., even though the confession statement made by the prosecutor was taken in the way as set out in the arguments. Thus, it is without merit to argue that Defendant 2's confession is false or false, and that there is no credibility. The following grounds of appeal are examined as to the conditions of sentencing by health team and the records, and it does not show that the life sentence imposed on Defendant 2 is too serious. Thus, it is also difficult to adopt this issue.

3. The ground of appeal against Defendant 2 by the public prosecutor is that, under the premise that the essence of the crime of forming an anti-government organization is an immediate crime which is completed at the same time as the establishment of the crime is an anti-government organization, the statute of limitations has expired as to this part of the facts charged by Defendant 2 with the starting point of the statute of limitations. However, this part of the judgment below is erroneous by misapprehending the legal principles as to the crime of joining an anti-government organization, which affected the conclusion of the judgment by misapprehending the legal principles.

However, as shown in this part of the facts charged, if Defendant 2 joined the 1955 Cho Jong-dong Branch's general affairs division from the time of 1955 to the time of 1955 to take office, and then joined the 194.4. 1961 to the members of the Joseon Labor Party, Defendant 2 is obvious that he had been engaged in the guiding duties of anti-government organizations at that time, and such so-called of Defendant 2 had already met the constituent elements of the crime of forming an anti-government organization, etc. under the National Security Act. Thus, the court below's decision of acquittal on the ground that the starting point of the statute of limitations period for this crime is the starting point of the statute of limitations period for this crime and that this part of the prosecution was instituted after the expiration of the statute of limitations period, is just and there is no error of law

4. Therefore, all appeals against the Defendants and the Prosecutor are dismissed, and part of the number of days pending trial after the appeal is to be included in the principal sentence against Defendant 1. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Lee Jae-sung (Presiding Justice)