The judgment below

The part against the defendant shall be reversed.

The defendant is innocent. The summary of this judgment shall be notified publicly.

1. Determination of the original judgment and the decision to commence a retrial

A. On September 1, 1976, the Gwangju District Court convicted the Defendant of violation of the Presidential Emergency Measures (hereinafter “Emergency Measures No. 9”) for the national security and protection of public order, and sentenced him to one year and one year of suspension of qualification.

(76Gohap100) The defendant and the prosecutor appealed, and the Gwangju High Court reversed the judgment of the court below against the defendant on February 17, 197, and sentenced 2 years of suspended execution and suspension of qualification to 1 year of imprisonment.

On February 25, 1977, the judgment subject to review became final and conclusive on February 25, 197.

B. A prosecutor filed a request for retrial on October 19, 2017, and this court rendered a decision to commence a retrial on February 11, 2019 on the ground that there was a ground for retrial under Article 420 subparag. 5 of the Criminal Procedure Act in the judgment subject to retrial.

Around this time, the decision to commence a new trial was finalized.

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) misunderstanding of facts, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment. 2) The sentence imposed by the lower court of unreasonable sentencing (one year of imprisonment and one year of qualification suspension) is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor: The sentence imposed by the court below on unreasonable sentencing is too unjustifiable.

3. The statutes applicable to criminal facts in cases where a new trial has commenced ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds of appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor on the grounds of appeal are the statutes at the time of a new trial.

In the event that the law was amended at the time of the judgment subject to new trial, the court shall apply the law to the crime at the time of the judgment for new trial, and if the law was repealed, it shall apply Article 326 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure

However, the penal law was repealed at the time of new judgment.

Even if the abolition was against the Constitution, it does not constitute a crime under the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.