logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
무죄
(영문) 광주고법 1974. 11. 13. 선고 74노184 제2형사부판결 : 확정
[명령위반피고사건][고집1974형,299]
Main Issues

Article 47 of the Military Criminal Act means the meaning of "justifiable Order" prescribed in Article 47.

Summary of Judgment

Article 47 of the Military Criminal Act provides that a legitimate order under the Military Criminal Act refers to an order issued by the National Assembly, which is a legislative body, to a specific matter that is important in the water side effect delegated by the National Assembly, which is a legislative body, and thus, the order that the chief of the company generally issues shall not be issued as referred to in the same Article.

[Reference Provisions]

Article 47 of the Military Criminal Act

Reference Cases

Supreme Court Decision 69Do113 delivered on February 11, 1971 (Supreme Court Decision 9459 delivered on November 11, 197, Supreme Court Decision 19Nu55 delivered on July 19, 199, Supreme Court Decision 47(13)1541 delivered on July 1

Escopics

Defendant

Appellant. An appellant

Defendant

Judgment of the lower court

The first instance court's first instance court's General Military Law Meeting (68 Assistant Military Law Mutual Aid 188)

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is innocent.

Reasons

In light of the above, the judgment of the court below was based on the purport that the defendant, who belongs to the third party of the first Telecommunication Group in the facts charged, and the third party of the Army Captain in the Army, was ordered to strictly prohibit the launch of ball cartridges except for specific cases of the non-indicted on behalf of the captain of the Army in the Army, and when he was dispatched to the counter-espionage commander in the Yan-gun of the Chungcheongbuk-gun, the defendant was on duty in the counter-espionage under the command of the knbbs of the knbs of the knbs of the knbs of the knbs of the knbs of the knbs of the knbs of the knbs of the knbs of the knbs of the knbs of the knbs of the knbs of the knbs of the knbs of the knbs of the knbs of the knbs of the k.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below shall be reversed in accordance with Article 364(2) and (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the grounds for appeal by the defendant.

The summary of the facts charged by the military prosecutor of the Court of Law against the defendant is that the defendant was on dispatch while serving in the position of the former Orderer and Orderer, the document office to which the defendant belongs, from June 21, 1968 to June 27, 1968, while serving in the position of the former Orderer and Orderer, the defendant was on dispatch while serving in the position of the former Orderer and Orderer.

(1) On the 21st of the same month of the place where the ball cartridges was golded, the non-indicted on the 21st of the same month was ordered by the captain, who was in charge of the above operations, and without permission, the Defendant 5 times before and after the above operations area, etc., went against the order of the mid-term commander, who was in charge of the legitimate order.

(2) In addition, during the military operations, against the order of the commander in the wartime of the area where drinking other than a certain quantity is prohibited, the order of the commander of the exhibition hall, which is a legitimate order, is violated by drinking three smoking of three inclusiums at least the quantity at the 11:0 on the 15th day of the same month, which is the same day during the operation period, by drinking three inclusiums located in the 4th day of the same month at the 4th day of the same month. The reason for reversal is that the order of prohibition of smoking or drinking by the above commander cannot be deemed a justifiable order under Article 47 of the Military Criminal Act.

Therefore, since the facts charged by the above military prosecutor against the defendant do not constitute a crime, the defendant is acquitted in accordance with Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

It is so decided as per Disposition with the above reasons.

Judges Park Young-young (Presiding Judge)

arrow