As long as a voluntary report is made to an investigative agency on one of several criminal facts, even if the motive of the voluntary report is not transparent and the accomplice is left thereafter, the number of self-denunciations shall be effective for the part of the criminal facts.

Since some of the criminal facts are voluntarily reported to an investigative agency, even if the motive is not transparent and the accomplice is left thereafter, the number of self-denunciations shall be effective for the part of the criminal facts.

Article 13 of the National Security Act and Article 52 of the Criminal Act

Defendant

Seoul Criminal District Court Decision 69No108 delivered on April 26, 1969, Seoul High Court Decision 69No108 delivered on April 26, 1969

The original judgment shall be reversed, and

The case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

1. Ground of appeal Nos. 1 and ground of appeal No. 1 of the same Kim Jong-chul

According to the judgment of the court below and the records, the court below found the defendant guilty of the whole fact that he voluntarily surrendered to the Central Information Department as it is, and found the defendant guilty of the violation of the National Security Act. The reason why the defendant's assertion of absolute self-denunciation reduction and exemption was rejected, and he knew that he was in the middle of the month, but he knew that he was in the middle of the five years after he was in the middle of the month, and there were some significant motives to recognize that he was in the middle of the five years, and that he was in the middle of the five years, and that he was in the face of security, even though he was unable to give a temporary reply, and even if there was no piracy and transmission by the back of the first instance trial without the testimony and transmission by the non-indicted witness, the old age broadcasting by A-3 broadcast of the defendant was continued to be in the middle of the first instance trial. Thus, since the defendant's old age broadcasting against the defendant continued to surrender the defendant when he was able to do so, the defendant did not surrender the defendant's true self-denunciation or attempted.

However, the self-denunciation itself is not a crime, but a crime as a reason for reduction of or exemption from punishment, and if a voluntary declaration to an investigation agency is made, it shall meet the requirements. Therefore, the motive of the self-denunciation of the defendant is not transparent, and the number of self-denunciation cannot be effective, and if the defendant voluntarily surrenders to a part of the concurrent crime, the part of the self-denunciation shall be valid. Therefore, it shall not affect the part of the self-denunciation because the defendant did not report some of the facts of the crime after the escape, and it shall not affect the part of the self-denunciation, and the part in which the defendant did not voluntarily surrenders to the defendant shall remain the object of punishment, and as long as there is no evidence to deem that he voluntarily surrendered by the Ordinance of North Korea on the record, it shall not be a reason for the cancellation of the disposition of postponement of the public prosecution. If we do not recognize the number of self-denunciation, it shall be recommended by the majority of the criminal, and the purpose of the system of the investigation agency shall be the end of the original judgment.

It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

[Judgment of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge) Dog-Jak Kim Gyeong-ri, Kim & Kim