The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant shall announce the judgment of innocence against the defendant.

The following facts are acknowledged according to the progress records of the case.

On November 27, 1978, the Seoul Criminal Court sentenced the defendant to a short-term one year and six months of imprisonment and a suspension of qualification for the defendant on the charge of violating the Presidential Emergency Decree No. 9 on November 27, 1978.

On May 4, 1979, the Seoul High Court case No. 76No24, on which the defendant appealed, the judgment of the court below was reversed, and the defendant was sentenced to one year of imprisonment and a suspension of qualification for the defendant, but the decision was sentenced to a stay of execution for two years of imprisonment, and the above judgment became final and conclusive.

On April 28, 2011, the Defendant filed a motion for a new trial as to the instant judgment subject to a new trial by this Court 201No69. On April 19, 2013, this Court made clear that the facts charged for the judgment subject to a new trial had been governed by the penal law, and, in Supreme Court en banc Order 201Hu689 Decided April 19, 201, inasmuch as the Emergency Measure No.9 was determined to be null and void from the beginning of the first ruling, it constitutes “when clear evidence to acknowledge innocence is newly discovered for a person who was sentenced to a crime,” and accordingly, the new trial order was decided upon holding that there was a ground for a new trial as prescribed in Article 420 subparag. 5 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the said new trial order became final and conclusive as is,

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

Defendant

The sentencing of the court below against the defendant (the maximum of one year and six months of imprisonment, the short of one year and the suspension of qualifications for two years) is too unreasonable.

The sentencing of the lower court against the Defendant by the Prosecutor is too uneasible and unreasonable.

Judgment

The summary of the facts charged of this case against the defendant is as shown in the attached Form.

The judgment ex officio is made prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant.

The statutes to be applied to facts constituting an offense in a case where a new trial has commenced on whether the Presidential Emergency Decree No. 9 was unconstitutional shall be at the time of judgment.