(영문) 울산지방법원 2015.10.16.선고 2014노245 판결

Imprisonment with prison labor for the defendant A and for six months of qualification suspension, and for four months of imprisonment with labor for the defendant B and for four months of qualification suspension, respectively.

However, for one year from the date this judgment became final and conclusive, the execution of each of the above imprisonment to the Defendants is suspended.

The part of the judgment of the court below which acquitted the Defendant as to each of the following facts: (a) the production and distribution of pro-enemy pro-enemy materials listed in the attached list of crimes (2) against Defendant A on June 6, 2008; (b) the acquisition and possession of pro-enemy materials listed in the attached list of crimes (3); (c) the possession of pro-enemy materials listed in the attached list of crimes (4); and (d) the violation of the National Security Act (e) due to the possession of the remaining pro-enemy materials except for Nos. 11 through 18 in the attached list of crimes (4); and (e) the Defendant B’s possession of pro-enemy materials listed in the attached list of crimes (pro-enemy, rubber, etc.).

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The defendants' common misconception of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

Today, North Korea, unlike the past, has been unable to be seen as an anti-government organization, but the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal principles or misconception of facts which found North Korea guilty of part of the facts charged in this case.

B. Defendant A’s mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

1) In addition to the 1st century, the act of possessing and distributing books or file-form representations, such as ‘Re', ‘personal affairs and materials', ‘complication report', ‘main ideology', etc., which was found guilty at the court below, cannot be deemed as an act that causes clear and present danger (system risk) in our system or order, and thus, it constitutes an act that violates Article 7 of the National Security Act, and the judgment below which found the defendant guilty is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles and the misapprehension of legal principles.

2) Although the defendant's act of allowing university students to read ‘the world as well as the world' and submit his appreciations to university students is within the scope of academic freedom and professor's freedom, the judgment below which found the defendant guilty is erroneous in misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles.

C. Defendant B’s misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

Although the act of producing, distributing, and possessing two documents, such as "AG", "the second nuclear decision", and "Re" which had been predicted to be a failure by the media, which was found guilty at the court below, cannot be deemed as an act that causes clear and present danger to our system or order, all of them cannot be deemed as an act that violates Article 7 of the National Security Act, it constitutes such an act, and the court below's judgment that found the defendant guilty is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles and misunderstanding of legal principles.

(d) A prosecutor;

1) Legal principles

A) As to the Defendants’ violation of the National Security Act by distributing representations against one person, the lower court found the Defendants not guilty, even if one person sent e-mail to one other, there exists an objective possibility that the said one person once sent e-mail to an unspecified or many unspecified persons, and the Defendants sent e-mail with awareness of such objective possibility, it constitutes “distribution” under Article 7(5) of the National Security Act. Accordingly, the lower judgment that acquitted the Defendants of each of the facts charged is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal doctrine.

B) As to Defendant A’s violation of the National Security Act by possession of literature and art works or expressive materials related to literary and artistic works, North Korea’s literary works contain the contents of the North Korea’s literary works, and each of these materials contained in the North Korea’s literary works, and Defendant A may sufficiently recognize the objective as a person who praises and encourages K’s activities, the lower court acquitted Defendant A of this part of the facts charged. However, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine.

C) As to the violation of the National Security Act by acquiring and possessing the expressive materials of Defendant B’s title “Third Schedule”, the court below acquitted the Defendant of this part of the facts charged, on the grounds that the BL sent out the expressive materials was punished for violating the National Security Act, and that the overall purport of the expressive materials is to protect the North Korea’s military power is superior to that of the U.S., and thus, constitutes the expressive materials stipulated in Article 7 of the National Security Act, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles.

2) Unreasonable sentencing

The punishment of the lower court (two years of suspended execution, one year of suspended qualification, two years of suspended execution, four months of suspended execution in the term of imprisonment for one year, and four months of suspended qualification) is too unfluent and unfair.

2. Determination

A. Determination on the Defendants’ common assertion

Although North Korea is a partner of dialogue and cooperation for the peaceful unification of South and North Korea, North Korea still has the character of anti-government organization that is bound to adopt our liberal democracy system while enhancing the hostile unification route despite changes in the relationship between South and North Korea, and therefore, it is established by the Supreme Court that the normative power of the National Security Act that regulates anti-government organizations, etc. is still valid (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2010Do189, Jul. 23, 2010).

The fact that North Korea has joined the United Nations under the name of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea does not necessarily mean that there has been a state approval among the other members of the United Nations. The current South-North Korea agreements, the South-North Korean summits, the South-North Korean Joint Declaration, and the South-North Korean summits and economic cooperation, etc. cannot be treated as an independent state independent from international law and domestic law in terms of international law and domestic law. At the present time, North Korea is not in harmony with the basic principles of our Constitution at the present point of time and is hostile to the socialist Constitution and the Constitution of the Republic of Korea, and the final purpose of North Korea is to build the State's own ideology and communistism society through the Chokdong Code, which also attempts to establish the socialist Constitution and the Constitution, and for this purpose, it does not appear that there is no sign of change in the process of implementing policies to support North Korea's social democratization and anti-North Korea's territory. Therefore, it appears that North Korea has no clear change in our free democracy system in accordance with the development of inter-Korean relations with the National Security Act.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below to the same purport is just, and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as alleged by the Defendants.

B. Judgment on Defendant A’s assertion

1) The judgment as to each crime of violation of the National Security Act (e.g., praises, rubber, etc.) committed by the distribution of "in addition to K's classical century", each of the acts of members of anti-government organizations, each of the acts of anti-government organizations, each of the acts of praises, propaganda, and concerts (4) 11 or

A) Whether pro-enemy contents are pro-enemy contents together with the 'the century'

In order to be recognized as pro-enemy contents under the National Security Act, the contents of the expressive materials must be active and aggressive to threaten the nation’s existence and security and the liberal democratic fundamental order, which are protected legal interests under the National Security Act. Whether the expressive materials have such objection should be determined not only by the overall contents of the expressive materials, but also by taking into account all the circumstances such as the motive for the production thereof, the form of the expressive act itself and matters related to the outside, and the circumstances at the time of expressive act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2009Do9152, Jul. 28, 2011; 2010Do1189, Jul. 23, 2010).

According to the evidence duly adopted and examined at the court below and the court below's decision, "as well as the century" is a summary of the KS, which is published for the purpose of external publicity in North Korea, and it is a content that emphasizes and its family's historical and aggressive sentiments in North Korea's socialist system and emphasizes the national historical and aggressive sentiments of North Korea's socialist system. The author of this book is K in the number of North Korea, which is an anti-government organization, and there may be a room for academic and H studies, but the main contents of the book are to promote the friendship of the North Korean system in the North Korean system by praiseing the North Korean father for the purpose of North Korea on the basis of the theory of receipt. In light of the substantial contents, production subject and production purpose of this book, etc., it is sufficient to view that this book constitutes pro-enemy pro-enemy contents and there is sufficient reason to acknowledge this part of the decision of the court below as a pro-enemy contents.

B) Determination on each of the offenses of violation of the National Security Act (e.g., praises, rubbers, etc.) by praises, promotions, and concerts

The term "act of concert" as referred to in Article 7 (1) of the National Security Act refers to an act of acting in concert with, or joining with, an anti-government organization, etc. to make a assertion or an act identical with, the activities of an anti-government organization. In addition, the interpretation principle that the National Security Act should be applied restrictively to the activities of an anti-government organization, etc. is likewise applicable to the crime of acting in concert with, or joining in, the activities of an anti-government organization. Therefore, the act of concert prohibited under Article 7 (1) of the National Security Act should reach the degree of actively expressing his/her intention to comply with, and taxes against, the activities of an anti-government organization, etc. to the extent that it is evaluated as being praise, encouraging, or promoting the activities of an anti-government organization, etc. (see Supreme Court en banc Decision 2003Do758, Apr. 17, 2008; Supreme Court Decision 2005Do75125, Oct. 12, 2012).

살피건대, 원심 및 당심에서 적법하게 채택, 조사한 증거들에 의하여 인정되는 다음과 같은 사정, 즉 ①① 대학교수인 피고인은 자신이 개설한 강의의 수강생들에게 K 회고록인 '세기와 더불어'를 읽고 감상문을 제출하도록 하였는데, 이 책은 앞서 본 바와 같이 북한에서 대외 선전용으로 발간한 것으로 K의 항일운동을 미화·과장하고 북한 사회주의체제의 민족사적·혁명사적 정통성을 강조하며 K, T의 영도력을 선전하는 것으로 반국가단체인 북한의 활동을 찬양 선전하는 내용인 점, ② 이 사건 피고인이 개설한 강의는 O, P, Q, R, M 등이고, O은 고전시가에 대한 전반적 지식과 민족적 특성을 익히는 것을, P는 원시문학에서 고려시가문학까지의 문학사를 익히는 것을, M은 고전 작품 독서의 지도능력을 배양하고 고전작품의 다양한 민족적 형상을 이해하는 것을 각 교수목표로 하였는데, 피고인은 이러한 교수목표 등 개설강의와 직접 관련이 없는 이적표현물인 '세기와 더불어'를 읽고 감상문을 제출하는 것에 학기 성적의 10%의 배점을 부여한 점, ③ 피고인과 증인 BC은 '고전시가'의 범위에 관하여는 학계에서 아직도 논란이 많고 원시부터 현재까지의 시가를 의미한다고 진술하였으나, 피고인의 0을 수강했던 증인 BD의 진술에 의하면 피고인의 수업에서 삼국시대의 시가를 위주로 배우고 고려가요까지도 배웠으며 19세기부터 20세기까지의 작품에 관하여는 배운 적이 없다고 진술하였는바, 1992년경부터 1997년경까지 작성된 '세기와 더불어'가 피고인이 개설한 수업에 필요한 고전시가 또는 고전문학에 해당한다고 보기는 어려운 점, ④ 피고인은 평소 수업시간에 단순한 대한민국의 통일·군사·안보정책에 대한 건설적인 비판 또는 남북상황, 대북정책 등에 대한 사적인 견해 피력을 넘어서, 학생들에게 K을 '장군 님', '위대한 혁명가' 등으로 호칭하도록 하고, 수업시간의 절반 정도를 북한의 미사일 실험이 성공했음에도 언론에서 이를 왜곡하여 보도한다거나, 북한의 화폐개혁이 성공적이라거나, 북한의 핵무기를 이용한 대미 정책이 훌륭하고 주한미군은 철수하여야 한다는 등으로 북한의 대미·군사정책을 지지하고 반국가단체 구성원을 미화하는 내용의 발언을 계속한 점, 6 피고인의 강의를 수강한 학생들은 대부분 평소 피고인의 위와 같은 발언을 듣고 피고인의 성향을 파악하여 '세기와 더불어'를 읽고 'K 장군의 민족애'를 느꼈다는 등으로 반국가단체 구성원의 활동을 찬양 동조하는 취지의 감상문을 작성한 점, 6 피고인은 학생들에게 감상문 작성을 위한 서적으로 이 사건 '세기와 더 불어' 외에 한두 가지의 책을 더 추천하였는데(예컨대 '벙어리 새', '감옥으로부터의 사색' 등), 학생들이 직접 구입하여야 하는 다른 책들과는 달리 '세기와 더불어'의 경우에,는 원하는 학생들에게 그 책을 파일 형태로 보내주겠다고 말하여 학생들이 다른 책보다 '세기와 더불어'를 쉽게 선택할 수 있도록 한 점, ⑦ 피고인이 H 박사이자 교수이기는 하나, 이 사건 공소가 제기되기 전까지는 '세기와 더불어'에 관한 논문을 작성하는 등으로 이 책을 순순한 학문적 연구에 활용한 적은 없었던 것으로 보이는 점, ③ 피고인의 2008년 1학기 0 수업에서 수강 학생은 0과는 전혀 상관이 없는 '국가보안법 유· 무용론'을 발표하기도 한 점(증거기록 제5019-1 내지 제5019-5쪽) 등을 종합하면, 피고인의 이 사건 행위는 학생들에게 단순히 북한의 주장을 학문적으로 소개하거나, K회고록을 H적으로 검토할 기회를 주려고 했다기보다는, 반국가단체의 수괴인 K을 미화하고 북한의 정치·경제·군사정책의 배경을 설명하며 그에 대한 우호적인 인식을 불러일으키기 위하여 이루어진 반국가단체 등의 찬양 · 선전 동조 행위에 해당하고, 이와 같은 피고인의 행위는 우리 헌법이 보장하는 학문의 자유 범위를 넘어선 것으로 보이므로, 원심의 판단은 정당하고 피고인의 주장은 이유 없다.

C) The judgment on each violation of the National Security Act (e.g., praise, rubber, etc.) due to the distribution and possession of 11 or 18 (in addition to the 1st century in the form of files) among the list of crimes (4) in addition to the 1st century.

In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the court below's ruling and evidence duly adopted and examined at the court below and the court below's ruling, i.e., ① the defendant not only possessed "the Monob century, which is a pro-enemy organization not directly required for his lectures or academic research," but also allowed students to read it to be used in Monobling and concert with anti-government organization, and the defendant sent books to students in file format B and distributed them to the majority [the distribution that Mo and 2.e. (1) above], unlike the distribution that the defendant sent them in file format in the form of file format and distributed them to the majority [the Monob century], unlike the fact that Mo and 2.e., the defendant sent them to the above anti-government organization with the first century as well as the fact that 'the defendant sent them to the Monob century' and the fact that 'the above pro-enemy organization' for the purpose of forming a democratic anti-government organization' and the fact that 'the above pro-government organization' did not exist.

2) On June 6, 2008, the production of pro-enemy pro-enemy contents, possession of each pro-enemy contents listed in the separate sheet (2) 1 through 7, 9, 19 through 27, 45 through 5, 62, 63, 78 through 80, 102, 106, 117, 118, 122, 124, 125, 125, 130, 141, 147, 152, 161 through 164, 177, 167 through 170, 173, or 181 in the separate sheet of pro-enemy contents of a crime (3), and judgment as to each violation of the National Security Act (e.g., misunderstanding and encouragement) arising from possession of pro-enemy contents of the pro-enemy contents of the National Security Act.

A) The crime of Article 7(5) of the National Security Act is clear as to producing, importing, copying, possessing, distributing, selling, or acquiring documents, drawing, or other expressive materials for the purpose of committing a pro-enemy act under Articles 1, 3, and 7(4) and is a so-called pro-enemy act. The purpose of the crime is an excessive subjective element for the establishment of a crime, which is separately required other than intent. As such, even if an actor recognizes the nature of expressive materials and conducts an act under paragraph (5), the element of the crime is not satisfied if the intent to commit an act is not recognized. Furthermore, the burden of proving the facts constituting the element of a crime prosecuted in a criminal trial is to be proven by the prosecutor, and the fact that an actor committed an act under paragraph (5) with the knowledge that he/she was an pro-enemy act, and the fact that the actor committed an act under paragraph (5) cannot be presumed to have a pro-enemy act. In this case, taking account of the circumstances and status of the defendant, the defendant’s career and status as the pro-enemy act under paragraph (5).

B) In light of the above legal principles, comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court and the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below, it is difficult to view that the Defendant was proven without reasonable doubt as to the fact that the Defendant committed an act indicated in this part of the facts charged with the purpose of pro-government organizations, etc. for the purpose of pro-enemy, rubber, etc., and therefore, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged, and there is an error of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension

① The Defendant was employed as G University H and full-time instructors and was employed as professors. Some of the representations stated in the facts charged in the instant case were written in the references to the Defendant’s thesis. The Defendant’s doctor’s degree appears to have engaged in research on modern literature as “RA,” and some of the representations appears to be necessary books for the overall understanding and research of North Korea’s literature.

Although the Defendant had students read the ‘the world as well as the world' during his lectures, the Defendant did not allow the students to read the number of representations of this case held by the Defendant.

The Defendant, through BA, had a student president, sent a large number of conversationss with BA by transmitting ‘the world' to students, and did not introduce or distribute the instant representations to BA in a private place other than ‘the world'.

③ Although the Defendant participated in political and social activities, such as ‘OY’s Truth Countermeasures Committee, ‘National Security Abolition Signature Campaign', ‘300 persons declaration for resolution of the preceding situation of the Yellow Sea,' ‘Korean Civil Joint and Several Women', ‘name of 1,000 people in civil society requesting the release of PH professors', ‘Korean Workers', ‘Mleleleblebleblight Meeting', the Defendant’s act is guaranteed by the freedom of political expression, and there is no risk of undermining free democracy’s fundamental order.

④ The Defendant attended the “BI” around July 2004, and took charge of the funeral ceremony of the PU promptly released from Korea on or around May 2007, and attended the above PU 49 materials around June 2007 and participated in the “PU 1 cycle of death” around May 2008. However, this appears to have participated in most of the events related to the PU, which were related to the PU, most of which are ordinary friendship, and there is no circumstance in which the Defendant actively participated in social activities to promptly and praise the PU. In addition, there is no circumstance in which the Defendant joined an anti-government organization or actively connected with such organization.

⑤ Of the contents of the representations sent by the Defendant to S, which were written on June 6, 2008, there are expressions, such as “The Nomenclatures only have been done in the line.” However, the overall purport of this expression is to deliver the Defendant’s sub-appeal regarding the over-suplelight of the candlelight regime, the over-suppression of the participants in the demonstration, the self-suppression of the participants in the demonstration, and the openness of the contents of the representations sent by the Defendant to S., and it is difficult to view that there is a strong sense

6. The expressive materials indicated in the attached list of crimes (2) that the Defendant acquired are kept in a passive manner, such as the labor newspaper that S unilaterally sent, and the answer letter to that Defendant was only twice. Of the expressive materials indicated in the attached list of crimes (3) held by the Defendant, there is room for considerable couple to have collected for the purpose of H research by the Defendant, such as novels, hand, etc., and the expressive materials indicated in the attached list of crimes (4) are not received from the interested organization’s participants but received through Internet search.

C. Judgment on Defendant B’s assertion

1) Determination as to whether the remaining representations, other than the third Schedule, are deemed to have a different aptitude

In light of the following circumstances: ① “AG directly prepared by the Defendant, at its own time, secedes from North Korea’s nuclear non-Proliferation treaties around March 193; and ② the Defendant’s response to North Korea’s propaganda system, which is a military co-ownership of North Korea’s e-mail, to the effect that the Defendant’s e-mail constitutes an attack with North Korea’s e-mail; ② the Defendant’s e-mail’s e-mail’s e-mail’s ability to commit an attack with North Korea by citing T as a member of an anti-government organization; ② the Defendant’s e-mail’s e-mail’s e-mail’s e-mail’s e-mail’s e-mail’s e-mail’s e-mail formation and e-mail’s e-mail’s e-mail formation and e-mail’s e-mail’s e-mail’s e-mail formation and e-mail’s e-mail’s e-mail’s legitimacy.

2) Determination on the purpose and intent of production, possession, and distribution of pro-enemy materials

In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the court below's decision and evidence duly adopted and investigated by the defendant, i.e., the fact that the defendant had not joined an immigration organization, ii) on July 10, 1987 that the Busan District Court had been sentenced to two years of suspension of execution and suspension of qualifications for violating the National Security Act; ii) the fact that the case occurred in 1987 is organized by the Republic of Korea; iii) the fact that the defendant had been published to the effect that the 6th anniversary of the fact that the 6th anniversary of the fact that the 5th anniversary of the fact that the 5th anniversary of the fact that the court below's decision and the court below's 0th anniversary of the fact that the 6th anniversary of the fact that the 6th anniversary of the fact that the 6th anniversary of the fact that the 6th anniversary of the fact that the defendant had been aware of the fact that the 6th anniversary of the fact that the 6th anniversary of the fact that the 6th anniversary of the fact that the 193th anniversary of the fact was found to be North.

D. Determination ex officio as to Defendant B’s violation of the National Security Act by each distribution of documents that “AG” sent each document to Defendant B, and that “the second nuclear power failure predicted by the press on January 6, 2009 and January 7, 2009,” which “the second nuclear power failure predicted by the media,” respectively.

A) The act of distributing pro-enemy contents under Article 7(5) of the National Security Act refers to the act of distributing pro-enemy contents to many and unspecified persons and having knowledge thereof (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2013Do7476, Nov. 14, 2013; 90Do1586, Sept. 25, 1990).

B) In light of the above legal principles, according to the evidence acknowledged by the court below and the court below, the defendant can recognize that "AG" was sent to A, AI, and to A and AM, who was aware of the success through e-mail, through the e-mail, the "the second nuclear compromise" that was predicted by the media. However, according to the above facts, it is difficult to view that the defendant was not sent the above e-mail to a 'specific person' and that it was sent to a 'specific person', and it is difficult to view that the defendant distributed the above e-mail to a 'specific person'. The evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to view that it was proved without reasonable doubt that the above e-mail was in a state in which the 'AG' can be distributed to an unspecified or many persons.

Therefore, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine that found Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

E. Judgment on the misapprehension of the legal principle by the prosecutor

1) Determination as to the Defendants’ violation of the National Security Act by distributing expressive materials to one person (e.g., praise, rubber, etc.)

A) Summary of the facts charged

(1) Around 11:59 on June 6, 2008, Defendant A manufactured and transmitted documents with the title “Re’s personnel and material” using the e-mail in his name used at G University (hereinafter referred to as “the South Korean Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea Headquarters”). The said documents, upon candlelight demonstration pertaining to Madle Madle Madle Mascick, she was in concert with the North Korean’s state/head of North Korea’s state/head of North Korea’s state/head of the society in South Korea, and praise North Korean T’s military status. Accordingly, the said Defendant, knowing that it would endanger the nation’s existence and security or democratic fundamental order, distributed expressive materials for the purpose of praise, encouraging, promoting, or aiding and abetting the activities of North Korea or its members, an anti-government organization.

(2) Defendant B

(A) On January 5, 2009, the above Defendant transmitted the documents of “AJ” to A by using e-mail in his/her own name at around 15:34, 2009. “AJ” is a content that K’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s nuclear and continental son’s son’s son’s nuclear and continental shot. Accordingly, the above Defendant distributed expressive materials for the purpose of praiseing, encouraging, promoting, or promoting the activities of North Korea or its members, an anti-government organization, even though he/she was aware that it may endanger the nation’s existence and security or democratic fundamental order.

(B) On January 6, 2009, the above Defendant transmitted documents to A by means of e-mail in his/her own name at around 16:16, 2009, including the e-mail of his/her own name, and “new order.” This is an act of promoting North Korea’s military friendship and praiseing T in the U.S. dollars. Accordingly, the above Defendant, while knowing that it may endanger the nation’s existence and security or democratic fundamental order, distributed expressive materials for the purpose of praise, encouraging, promoting, or promoting, the activities of North Korea or its members, who are anti-government organizations.

(다) 위 피고인은 2010. 5. 18. 14:57 경 본인 명의의 전자우편을 이용하여 A에게 '가상소설 《내일, 세계는 뒤집혔다. 제목으로 제1편 '동에 번쩍 서에 번쩍 빨찌산 식이로다', 제2편 'BJ은 워싱턴에 있는데...', 제3편 '이란에서의 T 국방위원장', 제4편 '내일, 세계는 뒤집혔다...' 문건을 각각 전송하였다. 위 문건은 2010. 5. 3.경부터 7.경까지 사이에 이루어진 T의 해외 기행을 소재로 다룬 소설로 세계를 주도하는 미국을 뒤집고 내일의 강성대국을 건설하자며 T과 북한 등을 미화 · 찬양하는 내용이다. 이로써 위 피고인은 국가의 존립·안전이나 자유민주적 기본질서를 위태롭게 한다는 정을 알면서 반국가단체인 북한 또는 그 구성원의 활동을 찬양·고무·선전 또는 이에 동조할 목적으로 표현물을 반포하였다.

B) The judgment of the court below

The court below held that "distribution", which is the constituent element of each of the above facts charged, means "distribution" that is widely spread on the world, and even according to each of the above facts charged itself, the defendants sent the above facts to only one person in a specific relationship with him/her by electronic mail, so it cannot be included in the concept of "distribution". As long as it is anticipated that the transmission to a large number of people is likely to be made, it can not be included in the concept of "distribution". However, such theory of "distribution" is an interpretation that has been recognized as a constituent element in Article 307 (Defamation) of the Criminal Act, and it should be punished only when there is an obvious danger that may cause substantial harm to the existence and security of the State or democratic fundamental order, and the concept of "distribution" can not be acknowledged as being available to a large number of people in light of the interpretation of the law of Article 7 (5) of the National Security Act, which prohibits the expansion of interpretation.

Each charge was acquitted in accordance with the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

C) Determination of the immediate deliberation

As seen in the above 2. D. above, it is difficult to view that the transmission to 1 to 2 certain recipients was in a situation where 'unspecified or many persons' can become known, and that the person who received the transmission from the Defendant has the possibility to spread it again to others. Even if such possibility exists, it cannot be deemed that the above expressive materials have reached 'the situation in which 'the situation in which 'the said expressive materials can be immediately distributed to 1 to 1 to 2 to 1 to 2 to 1 to 2 to 2 to 1 to 2 to 2 to 3 to 3 to 1 to 2 to 3 to 2 to 3 to 3 to 3 to 5,000, and such interpretation is difficult to accept as it is against

2) The judgment as to the violation of each of the National Security Act (e.g., misunderstanding, rubber, etc.) by possessing representationss in the attached Table Nos. 8 through 19 and the attached Table No. 8, 10, 28 through 44, 56 through 61, 64 through 7, 81 through 101, 103 through 105, 107 through 116, 119 through 121, 123, 126 through 129, 131 through 139, 142 through 146, 148 through 151, 153 through 160, 165, 166, 171, and 172 against Defendant A

A) Summary of the facts charged

(1) Book-type possession

On October 27, 2010, Defendant A kept the book book in the faculty room of G University:

On July 10, 192, the above booker is a book published by TWWn's author at his own will in North Korea, and TWn's initiative and construction on the basis of K's subject of art creation in 1992. The main contents are K, TWn's idea and construction, and it can be said that there is a temporary difficulty and ebbbbrance in the process of transition of history, but it can not be prevented human beings to move toward socialism. To fulfill the honorable mission of the people in the era and the preceding people, it is necessary to cause fundamental transformation of the people's spirit and order. The changes in the field of literature are realizing our basic ideology of labor revolution, such as labor power and ebratism. It is necessary to realize our ideology and ebratism.

On October 27, 2010, the Defendant, as indicated in the [Attachment 8 through 19] Nos. 8 through 19 in the List of Offenses (3) related to the crime committed by North Korea, including the Republic of Korea, was held in the professor’s office of G University. As such, the Defendant, while aware that the Defendant’s activities of North Korea or its members, such as anti-government organizations, such as K’s principal ideology, propaganda of North Korea’s system, or assistance thereto, etc., are likely to endanger the nation’s existence and security or democratic fundamental order, he/she held expressive materials for the purpose of praiseing, encouraging, promoting, or aiding them.

(2) Possession of file format

On October 27, 2010, the Defendant, at the professor’s office of G University, kept computer hard diskss, USB, 3.5 persons flouse diskettes in which the flouses, etc. are stored. On October 27, 2010, the Defendant, as well as the above Defendant, kept 8,10, 28 through 44, 64 through 77, 81 through 101, 103 through 105, 107 through 116, 119 through 121, 123, 126 through 129, 131 through 139, 142 through 146, 148 through 16, 1615 through 176, 106, or 106, etc. of North Korea’s present and democratic anti-government organizations, with the knowledge of the fact that the Defendant had been aware of such activities.

B) The judgment of the court below

The court below found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged pursuant to the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, on the ground that the above Defendant’s materials submitted by his defense counsel, as G University H and professor majored in academic affairs of modern nation, and engaged in relevant research activities while continuing to pay attention to North Korean literary theories or literary works in connection with his or her classical and literary work, it is difficult to conclude that the contents of this article are inconsistent with the existence and safety of the Republic of Korea or democratic fundamental order, or that it constitutes an act under paragraph (1) of this Article, even if he or she praises and expresses them, it is difficult to conclude that the contents of this case’s materials were possessed for the purpose of doing the act under paragraph (1).

C) Determination of the immediate deliberation

Comprehensively taking account of the circumstances acknowledged in the above 2.b. 2.2, it is difficult to view that Defendant A’s act in this part was proved without any reasonable doubt that there was an objective of pro-government organizations, etc. to engage in pro-government organizations, etc., and therefore, it was partially erroneous in the judgment of the court below that the objective cannot be recognized only in the case of literary or literary works dealing with the literature and art theory, but it is just in its conclusion because there was no error affecting the conclusion of the judgment on this part of the facts charged. This part of the Prosecutor’s assertion is without merit.

3) Determination as to Defendant B’s violation of the National Security Act (e.g., praise, rubber, etc.) due to Defendant B’s possession of the third attached table

A) Summary of the facts charged

On April 10, 2010, Defendant B received documents from BK representative BK e-mail No. 3’s e-mail from BK representative e-mail. The contents of the documents are as follows: (a) accepting North Korea’s attention and state; and (b) praise North Korea’s military power and system; (c) making it possible to sinking the U.S. military force and system; (d) North Korea’s kbs 9:29 on April 10, 2010, when the U.S. is small and medium, kbs 9:29 on the e-mail; and (d) 3’s table of the “Obs 3” on the e-mail of BK representative e-mail; and (e) giving rise to the destruction of the U.S. military force at the first place of the 3rd E-U.S. on the e-mail, it is presumed that the first time after the e-mail and the first day of the e-mail of the Korean Peninsula.g.

.... 북은..… 이번 키리졸브와 한미 합동 독수리 훈련을 강행한다는 발표를 하자, 더욱 강한 경고를 연이어 내놓았다.…올해의 북의 경고가 지난해보다 강해지고 있는 점 등을 종합해서 올해에도 미국이 키리졸브 훈련을 강행하면 뭔가 터질 것이라는 우려가 국민들 속에서도 적지 않았다. 그 우려가 현실화 되었을 수가 있다는 것이다. …특히 북의 핵심 타격 대상은 천안함이 아닌 핵미사일을 보유하고 있는 미국 잠수함이었던 것으로 보인다. 지금 정부와 미군의 발표는 믿을 수 있는 게 하나도 없다. 차라리 언론의 추적이 더 정확하다고 판단된다. …북은 10·4 선언 이후 백령도 대청도 등 서해 5도 지역을 북의 목을 노리는 비수라는 등의 발언으로 북을 끊임없이 자극해 왔으며 북의 핵시.설을 정밀 타격하겠다는 식의 끊임없는 대북공격 발언, 자유 민주주의 체제로의 통일운운, 그리고 대청교전에서 되돌아가는 북의 경비정의 대공 선제경고사격을 가한 후…. 이를 승전이라며 병사들에게 훈·포장을 내리고…등의 행동을 해온 국방부 일부 수장들을 경인5적에 포함시키고 남측 정부에서 벌을 주지 않으면 북이 직접 응징하겠다고 경고해온 바가 있다. …북은 이번 천안함을 반쯤 침몰시키는 것으로 남측 국방부 수장들을 타격하여 남측의 적대적 자세를 전환할 것으로 요구하려 했던 것으로 보인다. … 그리고 인민군 잠수함정 부대는 유유히 사건 현장을 빠져나가 북으로 넘어갔을 것으로 보인다. …북은 그간 6·15와 10.4선언까지 합의했으며 그 결과물로 지금 개성공단에서 세계적인 경쟁력을 지닌 제품이 생산되고 있지 않은가…북과 미국은 여전히 전쟁상태에 놓여있으며 평화협정을 체결하지 않은 상황이다. 그리고 남측과 미군도 방대한 무력을 동원하여 북을 공격하는 훈련을 턱 밑에서 진행하였다. 북은 이번에 가장 찾아서, 공격하기 어렵다는 미 잠수함은 완전 수장시켰으면서도 더 공격하기 쉬운 천안함은 7분간 최고 속도로 달려갈 수 있을 정도만 타격했다. … 그럼에도 국방부와 보수세력들 이 천안함 사건을 가지고 북을 테러세력이라고 하면서 국민들의 대북적대의식을 고취 시키는데 활용하고 보복과 제제를 하려는 행동조치를 취한다면 그 다음에는 적당한 경고 수준의 공격이 아닌 전면전으로 갈 가능성이 높다고 본다. …T 국방위원장이 연초북 탱크가 남한 곳곳을 점령하는 조선인민군 육해공 합동 군사훈련을 참관하였으며 그 관련 사진을 공개했다는 것은 사실 심각한 의미를 지니고 있다고 봐야한다.… 이번 사건에 대한 모든 정보는 보수를 대표하는 BO당 BP 정권이 잡고 있기에 이번 사건과 관련된 핵심 정보도 그들이 가지고 있을 것이다. 따라서 북을 테러국으로 지정하고 유엔에 고발하여 제재를 가하거나 작전 지휘권을 가지고 있는 미군에게 허락을 얻어 북에 군대를 보내 똑같이 보복을 하거나 어떤 정책이건 마음대로 사용할 수 있을 것이다. 하지만 그런 대응을 북이 보고만 있지 않을 것이다. … 분명한 점은 T 국방위원장은 BO당이 정권을 잡고 있을 때 뭔가 결판을 보려고 작심한 것으로 보인다는 점이다. …특히 지금 미국이 북을 또 다시 핵 선제공격 대상국으로 지정하였다. 북은 결코 묵과하지 않을 것이다. AN정권이 북을 핵 선제타격 대상국으로 지정하는 바람에 결국 북은 핵실험까지 했다. …남과 북 정상이 합의한 6.15남북공동선언의 구체적 실천강령인 10. 4선언에는 전쟁 당사국인 북미의 평화협정이 체결되기 전이라도 남과 북이 서해의 전쟁위기를 종시키고 평화공존할 수 있는 합리적인 안인 '서해 평화지대안'이 담겨있다. 이것도 사실은 남측에서 제안한 것을 북이 수용한 것이다. … 그런데 그것을 남측에서 BP 정권으로 바뀌었다고 전혀 이행할 생각을 하지 않고 서해에서의 남북 끊임 없이 충돌이 일어나고 국방부에서 북 핵시설타격, 미사일기지 타격 등을 운운하며 북을 자극만 해오고 있으니 사실 국민들이 불안해서 주식투자도 못하겠다고 아우성이다. 이로써 위 피고인은 국가의 존립·안전이나 자유민주적 기본질서를 위태롭게 한다는 정을 알면서 반국가단체인 북한 또는 그 구성원의 활동을 찬양·고무·선전 또는 이에 동조할 목적으로 표현물을 취득하여 소지하였다.

B) The judgment of the court below

The court below held that in order to recognize the expressive materials under Article 7 (5) of the National Security Act, the contents of the expressive materials must be active and aggressive to threaten the existence and security of the State and the free democratic basic order, which is the legal interest of the National Security Act. Whether such expressive materials have an objection or not shall be determined not only by the overall contents of the expressive materials, but also by taking into account all the circumstances, such as the motive for their production, the form and outside, and the circumstances at the time of expressive act, etc., and it shall not be separately removed only one of the expressive materials, but also by objectively analyzing the whole contents through the context. The overall context of the above Table 3, which is the facts charged in the instant case, is likely to cause the sinking of the said expressive materials by an attack in North Korea, and rather, it may be presumed that they were the main target of attack at the time of their acquisition. However, the court below determined that the part of North Korea’s subscriptive act in North Korea, which is obviously contrary to the official intent and purpose of the State’s fundamental order.

C) Determination of the immediate deliberation

A thorough examination of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the court below, it is difficult to view that the evidence alone submitted by the prosecutor alone proves that the contents of the expressive materials of this case are active and aggressive to threaten the existence and security of the State and democratic fundamental order. Thus, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant on this part of the facts charged is just, and the prosecutor's assertion on this part is without merit.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, since the above defendant's appeal against the defendant A has merit, Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act applies to the above defendant's appeal, and since the part against the defendant Eul has grounds for ex officio reversal as seen earlier, pursuant to Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the prosecutor's allegation of unfair sentencing is omitted, and all the judgment below is reversed, and it is again decided as follows after hearing (the prosecutor's appeal against the defendant A is not reasonable, but the prosecutor's appeal against the defendant is not

【Discretionary Judgment】

Criminal facts

Defendant A is currently employed as a professor at G University H and a full-time lecturer located in Ulsan National University on February 1992, 192;

A. Distribution of pro-enemy materials;

On July 17, 2008, the above defendant sent the title "A" to the professor of G University at H and the professor's office of G University at around 15:42, and over two occasions at around 15:43 and about 15:45, respectively, to the professorJ of G University at G University at around 15:43 and over two times, the title "A". In addition, the 1st century and the 1st century, as LK 80 days of birth, the defendant was published as a book for the purpose of external publicity from April 192 to August 197, 197, and the defendant was aware of the fact that the 15:43 and the 15:45 and the 15:45 and the 15:45 and the 5th century were sent to the professor of G University at G University, which was an independent anti-government organization, for the purpose of forming a democratic anti-government organization's existence or anti-government organization's activities.

B. On May 4, 201, the above Defendant expressed that he would read the above NM during the 20th century along with his lectures by the Defendant at G University 2010, and that he would give credits to the students H and N, etc. who are the students of this subject. The key questions presented by N were as follows. The first thought from KN’s view was that it was a human being, and that the second thought was not an unrecognizable Professor, and that it was a true fluent fluent fluent fluent fluent fluent fluent flus, etc., and that the Defendant would be able to read the above pro-enemy fluent fluent fluent fluent flus, etc., which was written in North Korea from 0,000 to 10,0000 won. The Defendant did not have any other flusent fluent fluent fluent flus.

On October 27, 2010, the above Defendant kept computer hard disks and USB stored together with the recent century, as indicated in the [Attachment Table 11-18] through [Attachment Table 11-18] at the faculty room of G University. In addition, the above Defendant’s book, which is the content of publicity of, or assistance in, the North Korea’s system, which is an anti-government organization, kept.

Accordingly, the above Defendant, while knowing the fact that it may endanger the existence and security of the State or democratic fundamental order, possessed expressive materials for the purpose of praiseing, encouraging, promoting, and instigating the activities of anti-government organizations or their members, and aiding and abetting them.

2. Defendant B is a novel who works in the name of “AF”.

(a) Production of representations;

1) On January 5, 2009, the said Defendant drafted a document “AG.” to transmit documents to A, a director of the New AH compilation at around 15:34, using e-mail in his/her own name, and around 15:55, to AI, a director of the New AH compilation.

‘AG' is the main contents of the defendant's own writing as follows: . Dow Dow Dow Dow Dow Dow Dow Dow Dow Dow Dow Dow Dow Dow Dow Dow Dow Dow Dow Dow Dow e this end, but Dow Dow Dow Dow Dow Dow ew Dow Do ew ew ew Do ew ew Do ew ew Do ew Do ew ew Do ew Do ew ew Do ew ew ew Do ew ew ew ew Do ew ew we ew ew ew ew Do ew ew ew ew ew k? ew ew ew ew we ew ew ew ew ew ew.

Accordingly, the above Defendant, while knowing the fact that it may endanger the existence and security of the State or democratic fundamental order, produced expressive materials for the purpose of praiseing, encouraging, or promoting the activities of anti-government organizations or their members, or aiding and abetting such activities.

2) On January 5, 2009, at around 15:34, the above defendant drafted a document called 'AJ' to transmit to A the documents using e-mail in his/her own name.

'AJ' also includes the contents that 'brutin', who was frighten by the defendant's own time and was frighten by K from his father, led to the nuclear and continental shot wave, and its main contents are as follows. The main contents are as follows: The 'AJ' is that K et al. al. was fright by his father's own time and frighten from his father's fright base, which was frighten by his father's own time and frighten from his father's fright base, which was frighten by his father's own time and frighted from his father's frightet, his mother's frightet, his mother's frightet, his mother's frightet and frighter's frightet, his mother's frightter's frightthy, his mother's frightthy and fright's family fright, his mother's frightter's fright.

As a result, the above Defendant, while knowing that it may endanger the existence and security of the State or democratic fundamental order, produced expressive materials for the purpose of praiseing, encouraging, promoting, or aiding and abetting the activities of anti-government organizations or their members.

B. Possession of acquiring pro-enemy materials

1) At around 09:30 on January 8, 2009, the above two defendants received answers to the 'Re: 2' e-mail title from A, which he sent to A, with the e-mail title of 'Re: 2', and new order.

위 답신은 북한의 군사적 우월성을 선전하고, T을 미화·찬양하는 내용에 화답하는 형식으로 북한의 선군정치, 과학, 영도예술을 찬양, 미화한 내용으로서, 그 주요 내용은 다음과 같다: 아, 1992년 객관은 하루 아침 잿더미 되었으나, 더미 속 불씨는 곳곳에 남아, 새 홰불로 타오르리 간절한 염원, 새 기지의 거름 되리 절절하고 못다한 꿈, 마침내 동방에서 주인 찾았네. … 베를린의 안개와 모스크바 눈보라를, 해치고 뚫어 왔다. 주지육림의 낚시밥도 던지고 왔다. 오직 백두향해, 단호하고 또 무한한 품속 찾아, 불씨들이여, 영도예술의 용광로, 화염으로, 타오르는, 무적강군의 열병대오로, 또 폭풍으로, 새 과학 쓰네.

As a result, the Defendant, while knowing that it may endanger the existence and security of the State or democratic fundamental order, acquired and possessed expressive materials for the purpose of praiseing, encouraging, promoting, or aiding and abetting the activities of anti-government organizations or their members.

2) On September 15, 2010, the above Defendant sent and kept the documents of “as to whether the documents of “as to whether the documents of “as to whether the documents of “as to whether the documents of “as to whether the documents of “as to whether the documents of “as to the documents of “as to the documents of “as to the

The above documents are the contents of Professor Professor Professor, and Professor Professor, in preparation for the President Q and K in the U.S.'s assertion and propaganda of North Korea. The main contents of the documents are as follows. The U.S. simply viewed the 19th century and the 20th century under the premise that the U.S. exists in the intermediate land. They usually returned to the 19th century to describe the 19th century as the militistist of the Western Empiresism, and the KaR professor's Gad's Kad's Kad's Kad's Had's Had's Had's Had's Had's Had's Had's Had's Had's Had's Had's Had's Had's Had's Had's Mad's Mad's Mad's Mad's Mad's Mad'.

Summary of Evidence

[Defendant A]

1. The defendant A's partial statement

1. Each statutory statement of the witness AS, AT, N, AU, AV, AW, AY, AZ, BA, and B;

1. Details of the sending of each mail;

1. A photo of the results of the analysis of digital evidence, the execution of a search and seizure warrant and the process of shotling the digital media: 1. Report, K meeting register, P subject, each report, each report, Korean classical register, and Korean classical register, such as a list of Korean classical records, and a list of Korean classical records submitted by students, such as Lept and G class N;

1. To send a report to the prosecution (verification of the date on which an investigation report is submitted to the prosecution's office register) and data verifying the course semesters of students;

[Defendant B]

1. Defendant B’s partial statement

1. The suspect interrogation protocol of Defendant B by the prosecution;

1. Application of statutes on the details of sending e-mail;

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

A. Defendant A: Articles 7(5) and 7(1) of the National Security Act (the distribution and possession of foreign expressions) and Article 7(1) of the National Security Act (the praises, propaganda, and concert of activities of anti-government organizations)

B. Defendant B: Article 7(5) and (1) of the National Security Act (the occupation of the production, acquisition, and possession of foreign expressions)

Article 14 of the National Security Act

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

A. Defendant A: The first sentence of Article 37, and Articles 38(1)2 and 50 of the Criminal Act (a) [Aggravation of concurrent crimes against the National Security Act due to the propaganda of members of anti-government organizations against B B with the largest character of the crime and the criminal administration]

B. Defendant B: Articles 37 (former part), 38 (1) 2, and 50 (Article 50 (Article 37 (1) of the Criminal Act) of the Criminal Act; Articles 38 (1) 2, and 50 (Article 38 (Article 37 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the production of the materials related to the “A

1. Suspension of execution;

The text of Article 62(1) and (2) of the Criminal Act (limited to imprisonment)

1. Confiscation;

Defendant A: Article 48(1)1 of the Criminal Act

Grounds for sentencing

1. Defendant A

In light of the circumstances, method, degree, etc. of the crime committed by distributing pro-enemy pro-enemy contents in the form of a file with high possibility of dissemination and distributing pro-enemy contents, and reading them with respect to credits, etc., the Defendant still continues to commit North Korea’s act of pro-enemy even in the past in the past of the Republic of Korea. In full view of the fact that there is a fundamental threat to the existence and security of the Republic of Korea and the free democratic fundamental order, the criminal liability is not weak.

However, considering favorable circumstances, such as the fact that the defendant was the first offender, the fact that the defendant was not actively engaged in social activities jointly with anti-government organizations, and the fact that the student appears to have complied with or not to have been engaged in the defendant's assertion, the court decides as ordered by taking into account the following factors: the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, motive and circumstance of the crime, and the means and result of the crime.

2. Defendant B

In full view of the fact that the Defendant produced, possessed, and distributed pro-enemy pro-enemy pro-enemy materials, and that the Defendant committed the instant crime even though he had already been punished for the same kind of crime, the liability for such crime is not somewhat weak, in full view of the fact that he committed the instant crime.

However, the Defendant distributed pro-enemy pro-enemy materials only to those who have the same opinion, and actually and jointly with anti-government organizations, etc., taking into account favorable circumstances, such as the fact that the Defendant did not actually engage in social activities with anti-government organizations, and taking into account various sentencing conditions indicated in the record, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive and circumstance of the crime, means and result

Parts of innocence

1. Summary of the facts charged

A. Defendant A

1) Production and distribution of pro-enemy contents

At around 11:59 on June 6, 2008, the above Defendant produced and transmitted documents to the United Nations S, by means of electronic mail in his name used by G University (i.e., the title of "the South Korean Headquarters for the Unification of the Republic of Korea") under the title of "Rae: Personnel and Data".

위 문건은 광우병 관련 촛불시위를 계기로 남한 사회를 식민지 사회로 규정하는 북한의 주의·주장에 동조하고, 북한 T의 선군사상을 찬양하는 내용으로서, 그 주요내용은 다음과 같다. 이제 정권의 체계가 거의 마비되어 가고 있습니다…다만 총독부 나름의 계산서가 있으리라 봅니다. 남녘에서 조차 총독부가 고립될 경우 제국의 수명이 예상 외로 단축될 것이기 때문입니다. 우리 쪽에서도 그를 계산하고 있어야 하겠습니다. 목적의식적이고 치밀한 계산서가 준비되어야 하겠습니다. …식민질서의 생명은 여전히 연장되리라 봅니다. 근본 해법은 선군에 있을 뿐입니다. 이로써 위 피고인은 국가의 존립·안전이나 자유민주적 기본질서를 위태롭게 한다.는 정을 알면서 반국가단체인 북한 또는 그 구성원의 활동을 찬양·고무·선전 또는 이에 동조할 목적으로 표현물을 제작 · 반포하였다.

2) Possession of acquiring pro-enemy materials

On April 16, 208, the Defendant: (a) opened a 5th anniversary of the foregoing anti-government organizations; (b) acquired the Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea’s Democratic Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea’s Democratic Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea’s Democratic Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea’s Republic of Korea’s Republic.

3) Possession of pro-enemy materials

A) Possession of a form of book

On October 27, 2010, the above Defendant kept a book for the philosophical principles of the subject thought 1 in the faculty room of G University.

On January 1, 1985, the 5th anniversary of the above principal idea was published by the North Korean social science publishing company (the author: X, Y, Z, AAB, AC, AD, and AE). After North Korea specified the subject idea in the Socialist Constitution as an official governing ideology on December 1, 1972, the 10th anniversary of the 40th anniversary of the foundation ideology in the Socialist Constitution, the 10th anniversary of the 1985th anniversary of the foundation ideology, the 10th anniversary of the foundation ideology, and the 5th anniversary of the foundation ideology, the 19th anniversary of the foundation ideology, the 10th anniversary of the constitutionalism theory, the 10th anniversary of the constitutionalism theory, the 3th anniversary of the constitutionalism theory, the 10th anniversary of the constitutionalism theory, the 2th anniversary of the 19th anniversary of the foundation ideology, the 10th anniversary of the constitutionalism theory, the 3th anniversary of the foundation theory of democracy.

In addition, around October 27, 2010, the Defendant, as indicated in the [Attachment List of Crimes (3)] around 2010 and around October 27, 2010, held 19 books, which contain the following: (a) praises and KR, etc.; and (b) propaganda of North Korea system, which is an anti-government organization, such as K principal ideology, or assistance thereto; and (c) thereby, the said Defendant held expressive materials for the purpose of misunderstanding, encouraging, promoting, or aiding and abetting the activities of North Korea or its members, who are anti-government organizations.

B) Possession of a file form

Around October 27, 2010, the Defendant kept a computer hard disc, USB, 3.5 sealbook, etc., in which the main idea of North Korea’s transfer agent was stored at the faculty room of G University. On October 27, 2010, the Defendant, as well as the above Defendant, kept at the faculty room of G University, 173 copies of expressive files containing the contents of propaganda of North Korea’s system, which is anti-government organization, or in a computer hard disc, USB, and 3.5 sealbook, with the knowledge of the fact that it may endanger the existence and security of the State or democratic fundamental order, in order to encourage, instigate, instigate, and instigate the activities of anti-government organization or its members, and held them in the same manner.

B. Defendant B

1) Distribution of pro-enemy materials

7) On January 5, 2009, the above defendant sent 'AG.' documents to A at around 15:34 by using e-mail in his own name, and around 15:55 to AI, respectively. The main contents of 'AG.' are as follows: . . HaG is the franch of the Cho Dong-dong Party from the entry of the total expenses, and Doz. Doz. Doz. Doz. Doz. Doz. Doz. Doz. Doz. Doz. Doz. Doz. Doz. Doz. Doz. Doz. Doz. Doz. Doz. Doc. Doc. Doc. Doc. Doc. Doc. Doc. Doc. Doc. Doc. Doc. Doc. Doc. Doc. Doc. Doc. Doc. 9888. Do.

Accordingly, the above Defendant, while knowing the fact that it may endanger the existence and security of the State or democratic fundamental order, distributed expressive materials for the purpose of praiseing, encouraging, or promoting the activities of anti-government organizations or their members, or aiding and abetting such activities.

B) On January 5, 2009, the above defendant sent 'AJ documents' to A using his e-mail in his own residence at around 15:34, 2009. Also, 'AJ' also leads to the defendant's self-furnation and 'bomist''s cher father's chermen' chermen chermen chermen chermen chermen chermen chermen chermen chermen chermen chermen chermen chermen chermen chermen chermen chermen chermen chermen chermen chermen chermen chermen chermen chermen chermen chermen chermen chermen chermen chermen chermen chermens.

Accordingly, the above Defendant distributed expressive materials for the purpose of praise, encouraging, promoting, or aiding and abetting the activities of North Korea or its members, which are anti-government organizations, with the knowledge of fact that it may endanger the existence and security of the State or democratic fundamental order.

C) On January 6, 2009, the above Defendant sent A documents of “the nuclear and new order of North Korea” by means of electronic mail in his/her own name at his/her own residence, and at around January 16, 2009.

위 문건은 북한의 군사적 우월성을 선전하고, T을 미화, 찬양하는 내용으로 주요 내용은 다음과 같다. 최근 미국 국방부 연례보고서 및 국가정보위원회 보고서가 북조선을 핵보유국으로 기술하는가 하면, 행정부와 의회에 제출된 한 보고서에서 북조선의 핵문제로 인해 쇠락하는 아메리카의 인상을 다루기에 이르렀다... 대북조선 정책에 있어서 그 오만성이야말로 매우 어리석은 정책이었음이 지금 속속 드러나고 있다. 시간이 결코 미국편이 아니었다는 것이 이번 베이징 6자회담을 통해 극명히 드러났다... 오늘의 북조선은 세계 최강의 군사력을 보유하고 있다는 미국을 공포에 떨게 하고 있는 명실상부한 군사초강국이다. 극동의 자그마한 국가 북조선이 어떻게 오늘의 군사강국을 이룩할 수 있었는가?... 1992년 4월 20일 평양에서는 제2의 공산당선언으로 불리는 평양선언이 채택되었다. 70여개 공산당 노동당 대표들이 사회주의의 유일한 보루로 남은 북조선을 옹호하여 사회주의의 정의로운 위업을 실현하자로 요약되는 국제사회주의의 맹약이라 할 수 있었다... K위원장은 그들에게 농담삼아 덧붙였다. 돈벌이하려는 사람에게는 미리 미국쪽을 추천하시고, 실력보다는 뜻이 견실한 사람들로 보내주시오. 오늘날 북조선의 군사기술이 기적 같은 엄청난 발전을 이루었다는 것뿐...K위원장은 자기수 첩을 찢어 감사합니다!라는 글을 써서 그들에게 보냈다고 전해진다... 세계를 아비규환의 수라장속에 몰아넣은 미친 괴물, 아메리카를 견제할 마지막 희망을 북조선에 건 세계의 많은 양심적 과학자들과 조직들이 어떻게 북조선을 도와 나섰는가는 아마 미국이 거꾸러진 다음에야 그 전모가 드러날 것이다. 이제 북조선은 거의 세계적 범위에서의 반미대결의 다음 단계로 넘어가고 있다. 십수년 전 미국의 LK 목사가 북한의 LL 당역사연구소장을 만났을 때, LL소장의 대답은 예루살렘도 아테네도 로마보다는 퍽 작죠. 한데 지금 그들의 정신이 세계를 지배합니다. 현상황을 보면 미국돈 달러가 미국의 몰락원인이 될 거라는 생각 안 드십니까? LK목사는 평양의 애국열사능에 안치되어 있다... LM, LN, LO 등 외세를 반대하여 끝까지 목숨을 바친 독립열사들도 거기 나란히 누워있다. 헤이그사건의 주인공 LP의 아들, LM의 아들, LN의 아들, LQ의 딸 등 그 2 세들도 거기에 누워 있다. 거기에 누워 한반도를 지배하던 마지막 로마제국이 무너지는 굉음이 들려오기를 목마르게 기다리고 있을 것이리라. 이로써 위 피고인은 국가의 존립·안전이나 자유민주적 기본질서를 위태롭게 한다는 정을 알면서 반국가단체인 북한 또는 그 구성원의 활동을 찬양·고무·선전 또는 이에 동조할 목적으로 이적표현물을 반포하였다.

D) On January 6, 2009, at around 16:16, 2009, the Defendant sent to A documents of "the second nuclear compromise" that was predicted by the media, using the electronic mail in his name. At around 18:05, at around 18:05 of the same month, the Defendant sent to AM the documents of "the second nuclear compromise" that was predicted by the media.

The above documents are contents of propaganda of North Korea's military friendship, propaganda of T and North Korea's system, and their key contents are as follows: The United States Armed Forces should be neutrally and peacefully unified (T). Our task has developed the Republic of Korea into a world class, in the fields of nuclear and space science (T).On the expiration of the term of office, we focused on the aspects of the policy for inter-Korean fishing vessels in India, and have already been determined from the starting point of view of the media that it had been determined the second nuclear confrontation, and its failure was determined through the view of the Republic of Korea. From 0th century, Korea's new political policy decision-making of the United States National Security Council was made by the 1st century and its new 5th century's new political order-making.

마) 가상소설 제1, 2, 3, 4편 위 피고인은 2010. 5. 18. 14:57경 본인 명의의 전자우편을 이용하여 A에게 '가상 소설 - 내일, 세계는 뒤집혔다… ' 제목으로 제1편 '동에 번쩍 서에 번쩍 빨찌산식이 로다', 제2편 'BJ은 워싱턴에 있는데...', 제3편 '이란에서의 T 국방위원장', 제4편 '내일, 세계는 뒤집혔다...' 문건을 각각 전송하였다.

The above documents form a theory that deals with T’s overseas attack between May 3, 2010 to July 7, 2010, and led the world, followed the U.S., and build a diversity of the internal ties, and praise T and North Korea, etc.

2) Possession of acquiring pro-enemy materials

On April 10, 2010, Defendant B received documents from BK representative BK’s e-mail No. 3’s e-mail. The contents of the above documents are as follows: (a) accepting North Korea’s military power and system; (b) sinking of North Korea’s military power and system is as follows: (c) North Korea could have been frighted and e-mail in the U.S.; (d) kbsbs 9:29; and (e) 3’s dynas dynas dynas dynas dynas dynas dynas dynas dynas dynas dynas dynas dynas dynas dynas dynas dynas dynas dynas dynas dynas dynas dy.

…북은 …이번 키리졸브와 한미 합동 독수리 훈련을 강행한다는 발표를 하자, 더욱 강한 경고를 연이어 내놓았다.…올해의 북의 경고가 지난해보다 강해지고 있는 점 등을 종합해서 올해에도 미국이 키리졸브 훈련을 강행하면 뭔가 터질 것이라는 우려가 국민들 속에서도 적지 않았다. 그 우려가 현실화 되었을 수가 있다는 것이다. ..…특히 북의 핵심 타격 대상은 천안함이 아닌 핵미사일을 보유하고 있는 미국 잠수함이었던 것으로 보인다. 지금 정부와 미군의 발표는 믿을 수 있는 게 하나도 없다. 차라리 언론의 추적이 더 정확하다고 판단된다. …북은 10·4 선언 이후 백령도 대청도 등 서해 5도 지역을 북의 목을 노리는 비수라는 등의 발언으로 북을 끊임없이 자극해 왔으며 북의 핵시설을 정밀 타격하겠다는 식의 끊임없는 대북공격발언, 자유 민주주의 체제로의 통일운운, 그리고 대청교전에서 되돌아가는 북의 경비정의 대공 선제경고사격을 가한 후... 이를 승전이라며 병사들에게 훈·포장을 내리고… 등의 행동을 해온 국방부 일부 수장들을 경인5적에 포함시키고 남측 정부에서 벌을 주지 않으면 북이 직접 응징하겠다고 경고해온 바가 있다. …북은 이번 천안함을 반쯤 침몰시키는 것으로 남측 국방부 수장들을 타격하여 남측의 적대적 자세를 전환할 것으로 요구하려 했던 것으로 보인다. …그리고 인민군 잠수함정 부대는 유유히 사건 현장을 빠져나가 북으로 넘어갔을 것으로 보인다. …북은 그간 6·15와 10·4선언까지 합의했으며 그 결과물로 지금 개성공단에서 세계적인 경쟁력을 지닌 제품이 생산되고 있지 않은가…북과 미국은 여전히 전쟁상태에 놓여있으며 평화협정을 체결하지 않은 상황이다. 그리고 남측과 미군도 방대한 무력을 동원하여 북을 공격하는 훈련을 턱 밑에서 진행하였다. 북은 이번에 가장 찾아서, 공격하기 어렵다는 미 잠수함은 완전 수장시켰으면서도 더 공격하기 쉬운 천안함은 7분간 최고 속도로 달려갈 수 있을 정도만 타격했다. … 그럼에도 국방부와 보수세력들 이 천안함 사건을 가지고 북을 테러세력이라고 하면서 국민들의 대북적대의식을 고취 시키는데 활용하고 보복과 제제를 하려는 행동조치를 취한다면 그 다음에는 적당한 경고 수준의 공격이 아닌 전면전으로 갈 가능성이 높다고 본다. …T 국방위원장이 연초북 탱크가 남한 곳곳을 점령하는 조선인민군 육해공 합동 군사훈련을 참관하였으며 그 관련 사진을 공개했다는 것은 사실 심각한 의미를 지니고 있다고 봐야한다.… 이번 사건에 대한 모든 정보는 보수를 대표하는 BO당 BP 정권이 잡고 있기에 이번 사건과 관련된 핵심 정보도 그들이 가지고 있을 것이다. 따라서 북을 테러국으로 지정하고 유엔에 고발하여 제재를 가하거나 작전 지휘권을 가지고 있는 미군에게 허락을 얻어 북에 군대를 보내 똑같이 보복을 하거나 어떤 정책이건 마음대로 사용할 수 있을 것이다. 하지만 그런 대응을 북이 보고만 있지 않을 것이다. … 분명한 점은 T 국방위원장은 BO당이 정권을 잡고 있을 때 뭔가 결판을 보려고 작심한 것으로 보인다는 점이다. …특히 지금 미국이 북을 또 다시 핵 선제공격 대상국으로 지정하였다. 북은 결코 묵과하지 않을 것이다. AN 정권이 북을 핵 선제타격 대상국으로 지정하는 바람에 결국 북은 핵실험까지 했다. …남과 북 정상이 합의한 6.15남북공동선언의 구체적 실천강령인 10. 4선언에는 전쟁 당사국인 북미의 평화협정이 체결되기 전이라도 남과 북이 서해의 전쟁위기를 종시키고 평화공존할 수 있는 합리적인 안인 '서해 평화지대안'이 담겨있다. 이것도 사실은 남측에서 제안한 것을 북이 수용한 것이다. …그런데 그것을 남측에서 BP 정권으로 바뀌었다고 전혀 이행할 생각을 하지 않고 서해에서의 남북 끊임 없이 충돌이 일어나고 국방부에서 북 핵시설타격, 미사일기지 타격 등을 운운하며 북을 자극만 해오고 있으니 사실 국민들이 불안해서 주식투자도 못하겠다고 아우성이다. 이로써 위 피고인은 국가의 존립·안전이나 자유민주적 기본질서를 위태롭게 한다는 정을 알면서 반국가단체인 북한 또는 그 구성원의 활동을 찬양·고무·선전 또는 이에 동조할 목적으로 표현물을 취득하여 소지하였다.

2. Determination

Each of the facts charged against the Defendants constitutes a case where there is no proof of a crime as stated in the above 2.b. 2.2, 2. D. and 2. E., and thus, a not-guilty verdict is rendered pursuant to the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act (However, as long as each of the facts charged is convicted of the violation of the National Security Act (M. 1. b. 1) and (b) due to the production of pro-enemy-state-state-state-state-state-state-state-state-state-state-state-state-state-state-state-state-state-state-state-state-state-state-state-state-state-state-state-state-state-U.

Summary of Judgment

A person shall be appointed.

Judges

The presiding judge, the whole judge

Judges Kim Gung-sung

Judges Kim Jae-sung

Note tin

1) On August 19, 2014, the Defendant stated, on the date of the first trial of the trial of the first instance on August 19, 2014, erroneous determination of facts and misapprehension of legal principles as well as unreasonable

According to the records, the defendant submitted a petition of appeal on February 20, 2014 and received the notification of receipt of the trial records on March 20, 2014, and filed an appeal on April 9, 2014.

It can be recognized that a statement of reasons has been submitted, and there is no ground of unfair sentencing except misconception of facts and misapprehension of legal principles.

Since the 20th day after the receipt of the notification of receipt of the receipt of the trial record was served on August 19, 2014, the allegation of unfair sentencing was made, and thus, the unjust sentencing

The assertion is without merit under Articles 361-4(1) and 361-3 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

2) On August 19, 2014, the Defendant stated, on the date of the first trial of the trial of the first instance on August 19, 2014, erroneous determination of facts and misapprehension of legal principles as well as unreasonable

According to the records, the defendant submitted a petition of appeal on February 27, 2014 and received the notification of receipt of the trial records on March 20, 2014, and filed an appeal on April 9, 2014.

It can be recognized that a statement of reasons has been submitted, and there is no ground of unfair sentencing except misconception of facts and misapprehension of legal principles.

The assertion is without merit under Articles 361-4(1) and 361-3 of the Criminal Procedure Act.