Whether the General Order No. 37 of the Army Chief of Staff (No. 2, 1979) with regard to sanctions against former actors, etc. is "justifiable Order" under Article 47 of the Military Criminal Act.

Article 47 of the Military Criminal Act provides that an authority in charge of the authority to receive the above Act shall issue an order concerning the matters that fall under the substantial contents of punishment, which is a legislative matter, in essence, issued in relation to important and physical specific matters delegated by the National Assembly, which are delegated by the above Act. Thus, Article 37 of the General Order of the Chief of Staff of the Army (No. 22, 1979) of the Army Chief of Staff emphasizes that the Army Chief of Staff shall unify the Army's public opinion on the Pacific activities and prohibit it, and it merely gives a general guidance on the sanctions to be imposed according to the rank of a person who committed sacity and harsh acts, and it does not constitute a legitimate order under the above Act.

Article 47 of the Military Criminal Act

Supreme Court Decision 82Do399 Decided July 27, 1982 Decided 68Do1846 Decided February 18, 1969, Supreme Court Decision 84Do250 Decided May 15, 1984

Defendant

Military prosecutor;

Attorney Han-chul

High Military Court Decision 83 High Military Branch Decision 394 delivered on December 20, 1983

The appeal is dismissed.

The prosecutor's grounds of appeal are examined.

Article 47 of the Military Criminal Law provides that an institution in charge of the authority to receive a legitimate order refers to the cases of the Supreme Court (see Supreme Court Decisions 68Do1846 delivered on February 18, 1969 and 82Do399 delivered on July 27, 1982) that the National Assembly, a legislative institution, referred to in the above law, refers to the cases of the Supreme Court (see Supreme Court Decisions 68Do1846 delivered on February 18, 1969 and 82Do399 delivered on July 27, 1982).

According to the records, although the defendant was aware of No. 37 of the General Order of the Chief of Staff of the Army related to the gold of the head of the armed forces and the head of the armed forces belonging to him, he violated the above general order of the Chief of Staff at around 12:00 on August 15, 1983, and violated the above general order of the above Chief of Staff, since he did not comply with the above general order of the Chief of Staff, the defendant's violation of the above General Order No. 37 (No. 22, 1979) of the Army Order No. 37 (No. 22, 1979) of the General Order of the Chief of Staff of the Army related to the gold of the head of the armed forces and the head of the staff of the armed forces related to the gold of the gold of the head of the armed forces, which was a general instruction about the disciplinary measure to be taken according to the person's rank of the head of the armed forces and the head of the armed forces. It does not constitute a justifiable order of Article 47585.

Therefore, the court below's decision that the defendant's act of violating the above general order does not constitute a violation of Article 47 of the Military Criminal Act, is just and it is not erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to Article 47 of the Military Criminal Act.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Lee Jong-woo (Presiding Justice)