1. The Defendant’s disposition of renewal of the period of security surveillance disposition against the Plaintiff on August 27, 2014 shall be revoked.

2...

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On July 2005, the Plaintiff met B, who was ordered by North Korea as an anti-government organization, and from then to October 2006, collected and reported the status of North Korea's business related to North Korea's business, the Plaintiff escaped from North Korea to North Korea on August 25, 2005 through the contact line between North Korea and North Korea on several occasions. On August 25, 2005, the Plaintiff escaped from China to North Korea to report the details of its activities, etc. and discuss the future activity plan, etc.

B. On August 16, 2007, the Plaintiff was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for three years and six months, suspension of qualifications for three years and six months, and completed the execution of the sentence on April 25, 2010 at the Seoul High Court.

(hereinafter) The Plaintiff was punished for violation of the National Security Act (hereinafter “instant case”).

On November 8, 2012, the Defendant issued a security surveillance disposition against the Plaintiff, and the prosecutor thereafter requested renewal of the period of security surveillance disposition against the Plaintiff on July 15, 2014, the Defendant made a decision to renew the period of security surveillance disposition (hereinafter “instant disposition”) on August 27, 2014, on the ground that “The Plaintiff’s duty to report under the Security Surveillance Act is not fulfilled and there is no intent to implement the disposition in the future, and it is difficult to deem that the awareness of compliance, such as the abolition of the National Security Act and the Security Surveillance Act, is established.”

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, Eul evidence Nos. 3 through 5, 19, 20 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. According to the Plaintiff’s unconstitutional Security Surveillance Act, security surveillance disposition is imposed by the Security Surveillance Disposition Review Board, an administrative agency.