The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

1. The following facts are acknowledged according to the final records of the judgment subject to review.

A. On December 18, 1975, the Seoul Criminal District Court’s governmental branch found the Defendant guilty of violating the Presidential Emergency Decree No. 9 (hereinafter “Emergency Decree No. 9”) for the purpose of national security and the protection of public order, and sentenced the judgment of the court below that imposed two years of imprisonment and two years of suspension of qualification.

B. On April 1, 1976, the defendant and the prosecutor filed an appeal against the judgment of the court below, and this court reversed the judgment of the court below and sentenced the defendant to a judgment subject to a retrial against one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, and one year of suspended qualification. The judgment subject to a retrial became final and conclusive upon the lapse of the period of appeal.

(c)

On October 24, 2017, a prosecutor filed a request for retrial of this case, and this court rendered a decision to commence retrial on November 30, 2017 on the ground that there was a reason for re-examination under Article 420 subparag. 5 of the Criminal Procedure Act in the judgment subject to retrial.

After that, there was no legitimate filing of a complaint within the appeal period, the decision of the retrial was finalized as it is.

2. Summary of reasons for appeal;

A. The punishment sentenced by the court below against the defendant (two years of imprisonment, two years of suspension of qualification) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below against the defendant is too unfortunate and unfair.

3. The statutes applicable to criminal facts in a case where an ex officio review of judgment has commenced are the statutes at the time of the judgment of retrial.

Therefore, if the law at the time of the judgment subject to retrial changed, the court shall apply the law at the time of the judgment for retrial to the crime, and if it was abolished, it shall apply Article 326 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act to the judgment for acquittal.

However, even if the penal law was repealed at the time of a new judgment, if it was against the Constitution and has no effect, the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act is stipulated.