The meaning of the National Security Act under Article 3 subparagraph 1 of the National Security Act;

State secrets under Article 3 subparag. 1 of the National Security Act refer to state secrets that are superior to state secrets that are defined by Article 2 of the same Act and Article 98(1) of the Criminal Act. Thus, it constitutes detection of State secrets under Article 3 subparag. 1 of the National Security Act, which is subject to specific secrets, such as photographing specific facilities prohibited from being exposed to the general public, by means of photographic activity, not being open to the general public.

Articles 3 and 2 of the National Security Act, Article 98 of the Criminal Act

Supreme Court Decision 64Do290 delivered on September 22, 1964 (Supreme Court Decision 4198 delivered on April 26, 196, Article 51 (1) (1) 1414 of the Criminal Procedure Act) 66Do284 delivered on April 26, 196 (Supreme Court Decision 3692 delivered on April 36, 196, Article 3 (2) 1387 of the National Security Act) 74Do1477 delivered on July 26, 1974 (Supreme Court Decision 10809 delivered on July 108, 198, Supreme Court Decision 22209 delivered on September 26, 198, Decision 323 (38)1462 of the Criminal Procedure Act, Court Gazette 496No792 delivered on April 27, 1974

Park Selection

Prosecutor and Defendant

Seoul Criminal Court of the first instance (73 High Gohap478)

Supreme Court Decision 74Do1477 Delivered on July 26, 1974

The guilty portion of the judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than three years and six months and suspension of qualifications for and six months.

One hundred and sixty days of detention days prior to the declaration of the original judgment shall be included in the above imprisonment.

The prosecutor's appeal against the acquittal portion of the judgment below is dismissed.

1. Judgment on the grounds for appeal by both parties against the guilty portion in the original judgment

The gist of the grounds for appeal by the defendant and his defense counsel (the grounds for appeal by the defendant are apparent to be submitted after the deadline for submitting the grounds for appeal by his defense counsel) is as follows: First, there is no evidence to acknowledge the facts of crime of crime of crime of crime of crime of crime of crime of crime of crime of crime of crime of crime of crime of crime of crime of crime of violation of the State and the military secrets, such as the facts of the indictment in this case; second, there is no evidence to acknowledge the facts of crime of crime of crime of crime of crime of crime of crime of crime of crime of crime of crime of crime of crime of crime of crime of crime of crime of crime of crime of crime of crime of crime of the defendant; although there is no statement corresponding to the facts of the indictment in the prosecution; even if there is a confession, it should be deemed that there is no probative value in light of the defendant's statement in the court below and the witness's testimony presented by the court below; second, even if there is no evidence to reinforce it, the judgment of the court below which found the above facts of crime of crime of crime of crime of crime of crime of crime of crime of crime of crime of defendant.

Therefore, first of all, the defendant's first ground for appeal in a mistake of facts should be considered.

In light of the facts charged against the defendant in violation of the National Security Act, Article 2 of the National Security Act and Article 98 (1) of the Criminal Act, and the facts charged against the defendant were collected, detected, and divulged for the purpose of executing military purposes as provided by Article 3 subparagraph 1 of the National Security Act, and since two crimes were classified into several crimes, it shall be sentenced to the violation of Article 3 subparagraph 1 of the National Security Act, among which punishment was imposed pursuant to Article 50 of the same Act, and it shall be decided that the defendant should be sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor within the scope of punishment imposed on the defendant for a certain period of time after selecting the term of life imprisonment, and that the defendant should be sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor within the scope of punishment imposed on the non-indicted 1, who is not a witness of the State secrets, and thus, it shall be viewed that the defendant's act of collecting military secrets, such as politics, economy, culture, etc., was directly connected with the military force of the State as provided by Article 98 (1) of the Criminal Act.

Therefore, in accordance with Articles 364 (6) and 361-5 (14) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the judgment of the court below shall be reversed, and a party member shall be ruled again after pleading.

(a)A part of the charge;

(Criminal Facts)

피고인은 한국에서 출생하여 두살 때 도일하여 그곳에서 성장, 1960.3. 일본국 소재 동북대학교를 졸업하고, 이어 동 대학교 대학원에 진학, 석사 및 박사과정을 이수, 1965.4. 공학박사학위를 획득한 후 1968.3. 영주 귀국하여 서울대학교 공과대학 강사로 피임, 1969.1.에는 동교 조교수로 승진 종사중인 자로서 북괴가 대한민국을 부인하고 무력적화통일을 기도하는 반국가단체임은 물론 재일조총련 역시 북괴를 지지 그 목적달성을 기도하는 반국가단체이고, 한편 공소외 4는 1962.8.경부터 수차 만나 동인으로부터 장학금명목의 금원도 받고 레닌주의사상, 조선화보와 같은 책자를 받는 동안에 동인이 위 조총련의 구성원인 점 등을 알게되었음에도 불구하고, 1962.12.5.경 공소외 4와 사전 약속한 접선장소인 일본 동경도 우에노(상야)역 근처 옥호불상 여관에서 만나 동인으로부터 자본주의의 모순성을 지적하는 설명을 듣고 동인과 이에 대한 토론을 하고, 동인으로부터 장학금명목으로 일화 금 15,000엥, 여비명목으로 금 10,000엥을 받고, 피고인이 불원 한국경제인협회 초청에 의하여 재일거류민단계의 산업기술연구회 회원의 한사람으로 한국내 산업시찰차 한국에 들어가게 된데 대하여 동인과 이야기 하던끝에 동인으로부터 한국에 들어갈 때에는 카메라를 가지고 가서 각종 공장시설, 그 경영인물, 사회실태등을 사진 촬영하고 각종 공업의 수준, 농촌의 빈곤한 상태등을 파악하여 저명인사를 광범위하게 접촉하고, 그들의 전문분야에 관한 기밀등 국가기밀 전반을 탐지 보고할 것이며, 침투직전에 다시 접선하여 구체적인 추가지시를 받으라고 지령을 받고, 이에 응낙 헤어진 후, 같은 달 15일 18:00경 전시 우에노역 근처의 여관에서 공소외 4를 다시 만나 동인으로부터 여비명목으로 일화 금 50,000엥을 받고, 전일 부여한 임무를 성실히 수행하라는 추가지령을 받은 다음, 카메라(일제캐논) 1대를 소지하고, 다음날인 같은 날 16일 15:00경 전시연구소 회원으로 위장 같은회원 11명과 함께 시찰단장인 위 연구소장 공소외 2의 인솔아래 열차편으로 우에노역을 출발 그날 17:00경 시모노세끼에 도착 2박한 후 같은 달 18일 17:00경 아리랑호 선편으로 시모노세끼항을 출발 그 다음날(19일) 01:00경 부산항에 도착, 08:00경 부산에 상륙하여 한국경제인협회에서 보낸 안내원(1명)의 안내를 받으면서 동 시찰일정표에 따라

(A) On 12:00 on 12:12:19 December 19, 1962, the study was conducted by visiting the shipbuilding located in Busan at the time of the construction and the site of the work, and the study was conducted on 14:30 on 14:30 on 14:30 on her day, the study was conducted by photographing the gold company factory located in Busan at the time of the visit, the front house of the factory and the interior facilities of the factory, and the photograph of the same photograph as the first shop located in Busan at around 16:00, the study was conducted by visiting the ocean university at around 17:00, and the photograph was taken and kept

(B) Around 10:00 on December 20, 1962, at the same time, Busan entered Daegu-si-si-si-si-si-si-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-type-

(C) 13:00, at the time of Daegu on December 21, 1962, on a bus of 10:00, enter the 13:00 square meters, to visit a door cement factory, to install the factory, to cover the facility of the factory, to cover the site of the work, and to 1:00, to stay together in the door cement dormitory;

(D) on December 22, 1962, by bus 10:00, visit the Chungcheong Fertilizer Plant from the door-to-door, taking the process of the process of the process of the process of the process of the process of the process of the process of the factory before the factory, and making the process of the process at the inn of the inn of the inn of the inn of the Y

(E) by means of a bus at around 10:00 on December 23, 1962, the Gangwon-do Young Power Plant is visited, the front and power generator, etc. of the same power plant are taken, and the figures, etc. of the employees working in the same lawsuit are taken, and one string together with their daily activities within the same month;

(F) On December 24, 1962, after arrival at Seoul on December 24, 1962, to visit the Seoul Military Research Institute and to visit the Seoul Military Research Institute, the status of the laboratories, and the progress of nuclear research institutes and the status of internal machinery facilities;

(G) On December 25, 1962, at around 10:00, at around 16:00, at the time of the inspection of the Korea Distribution Complex, Korea Machinery Plant, etc. located Incheon, one stop to arrive in Seoul at around 16:00 of the same process of shooting the entire plant and internal facilities of each factory;

(h) by visiting an electricity company located in Echeon-si, Gyeonggi-si on December 26, 1962, at around 10:00, to take photographs of the factory charter and internal facilities;

(i) On 11:00 on 27 December 1962, 11:20, visiting the door-to-door stores such as the Scambling 1:00, taking photographs of the field-to-scam guard posts, etc. which are military installations; and on 13:00 on 13:00, the test members were dissolved by agreement with their own personal behavior, and they were out of the column

(j) On December 27, 1962, at around 16:00, Nonindicted 3 (year 49 years old) visited Jongno-gu 17-10, an official professor of the Seoul East-do University, Seoul, for the purpose of performing the duty of confidential access to the personal space, to visit 16:10 on December 16, 1963, and to conceal 15:0 on January 16, 1963, the government secret was collected at around 20:10 on October 20, 199, by informing Nonindicted 3 professors of the current environment, Seoul, the name of the student, the number of students, and the number of students: 20 on March 16, 1963, the government secret was collected at around 20:10 on March 15, 1963 by making it known to 20 on May 20, 200 on the arrival of the train at around 20:10 on September 30, 1963.

(Abstract of Evidence)

1. Each statement that conforms to the judgment of the court below and the part of the fact that the defendant made in the party court before and after remand;

1. Each part of the statements that correspond to the facts stated in the judgment of the court below, Nonindicted 1, 2, 3, Nonindicted 5, and Nonindicted 6’s witness before remanding to the court below or in the trial court before remanding to the court below

1. Each protocol of interrogation of the accused prepared by the prosecutor, which corresponds to the facts stated in the judgment

1. In full view of the existing facts of 20 copies of a photograph bound in the record (Nos. 1 through 20), the above facts of the crime can be recognized, which are sufficient proof.

(Application of Acts and subordinate statutes)

The judgment of the defendant, inclusive, corresponds to Articles 2 and 98 (1) of the National Security Act, and Article 98 (1) of the Criminal Act. This case is the first crime committed by the defendant, and the defendant is not harsh enough to give the scholarship in the poor family environment at the time of education, and the motive that the defendant was unable to commit the crime of this case, who was in contact with the non-indicted 4 at the end of his study, was in progress in fostering the defendant as assistant professor at the Seoul National University University of Law as an assistant professor at the Seoul National University of Law before he returned to Korea and detained him in this case. Since it is recognized that there is a reason to consider his circumstances such as the fact that the defendant is trying to repent his mistake through long-term confinement life, and that there is a reason to consider the above circumstances, the court below should be sentenced to imprisonment within the scope of imprisonment with prison labor for not more than three years and six years, and suspension of qualifications for the above defendant under Article 55 (1) 3 of the National Security Act, and shall be included in the above imprisonment with prison labor for not more than six years and six months.

(B) The non-guilty portion

On the other hand, the prosecutor institutes a public prosecution on the premise that all the facts in the judgment are the detection, collection, and leakage of the state secrets for the performance of the general purpose under Article 3 subparag. 1 of the National Security Act. As seen in the grounds for reversal, among the facts charged against the defendant, it is clear that the detection, collection, and leakage of the state secrets for the performance of the general purpose under Article 3 subparag. 1 of the National Security Act constitutes a case where there is no proof of the facts charged. Thus, the defendant shall be acquitted in accordance with the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act. However, the crime of detection, collection, and leakage of the state secrets for the performance of the general purpose under Article 3 subparag. 1 of the National Security Act is a commercial concurrent relationship under Article 40 of the Criminal Act, which is a crime of violation of Article 3 subparag. 1 of the same Act and the crime of collection, detection, and leakage.

2. Judgment on the grounds of appeal by the prosecutor concerning the part not guilty of the judgment below

The gist of the prosecutor's appeal as to the acquittal portion of the judgment of the court below is that the court below acquitted the prosecutor, and it erred in the misapprehension of facts as a mistake in the preparation of evidence, and affected the judgment, considering that the prosecutor's statement of the defendant, the statement of the defendant in the court, the secret and organizational nature of North trup agent, and the fact of locking out and offering convenience among the facts charged in the prosecution of this case is sufficiently recognized.

In order to constitute a crime of diving among the facts charged in this case, the defendant received any order from an anti-government organization or a member thereof before returning to the Republic of Korea, and the defendant at the time of entry must have the intention and purpose of practicing such an anti-government organization or a member thereof. For the crime of offering convenience, first of all, the defendant should know that the defendant is a person who committed a crime of the National Security Act or anti-public law. There is no indication that the above facts can be acknowledged among the suspect interrogation protocol prepared by the prosecutor. Among each protocol of statement prepared by the defendant in the judicial police, the part of the prosecutor's interrogation protocol prepared by the defendant cannot be believed in light of the above contents among the suspect interrogation protocol prepared by the prosecutor, and even after examining the contents of the statement prepared by the court of the court below in detail by the prosecutor's protocol of the court below, it cannot be seen that there is no evidence to acknowledge the facts charged in this part of the crime, and therefore, the decision of the court below to dismiss the defendant's appeal under the latter part of Article 35 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judge Lee Ho-ho (Presiding Judge)