The sentence of sentence shall be suspended for the defendant.

Of the facts charged in the instant case.

1. Progress of the retrial procedure of this case

A. On August 11, 1978, the Defendant and the applicant for reexamination (hereinafter “Defendant”) were found guilty of the attached facts charged at the General Law Meeting of the Water Security Headquarters, and was sentenced to two years imprisonment and suspension of qualification for a violation of the public law violation and the presidential emergency measures for the protection of national security and public order pursuant to Article 4(1) of the former Anti-Public Act (repealed by Article 2 of the Addenda of the National Security Act, Act No. 3318, Dec. 31, 1980; hereinafter the same shall apply) and Articles 7 and 1(a) of the former Anti-Public Act (hereinafter “Emergency Measure No. 9”), and five years.

Around that time, the foregoing judgment became final and conclusive (hereinafter “instant judgment subject to a retrial”). B. On May 27, 2013, the Defendant filed a petition for a retrial regarding the instant judgment subject to a retrial.

On February 3, 2016, the court rendered a decision to commence a retrial on the ground that “The Emergency Decree No. 9 exceeded the bounds of the purpose without satisfying the requirements and excessively limits the freedom and rights of the people, thereby infringing on the fundamental rights of the people guaranteed by the Constitution, and thus, is unconstitutional since it has violated the Constitution of the Republic of Korea prior to its cancellation or invalidation, and even in light of the current Constitution of the Republic of Korea where the provisions guaranteeing the fundamental rights infringed, the judgment subject to a retrial has grounds stipulated in Article 420 subparag. 5 of the Criminal Procedure Act,” and the above decision became final and conclusive as it is.

2. In an indivisible final and conclusive judgment which found several criminal facts in the relationship of concurrent crimes within the scope of judgment by this court to be guilty, where it is deemed that there exist grounds for request for retrial only for a part of the facts constituting the crime, the judgment with respect to which one sentence is pronounced shall be rendered, and thus, the decision to commence retrial shall be made on the whole judgment.