The judgment below

The part against the defendant shall be reversed.

The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant.

1. The following facts are acknowledged according to the progress records of the case.

A. On February 24, 1979, the Defendant was indicted for the following facts charged: (a) violation of the Presidential Emergency Decree for the National Security against the Defendant and the Protection of Public Order (hereinafter “Emergency Decree No. 9”); and (b) violation of the Presidential Emergency Measure for the Protection of Public Order (hereinafter “Emergency Measure No. 9”), and sentenced the Defendant to one year and six months of imprisonment and two years of suspension.

B. Accordingly, the Defendant appealed on the grounds of misapprehension of legal principles, unreasonable sentencing, and the prosecutor’s appeal. On June 21, 1979, the Seoul High Court, the appellate court rejected the Defendant’s assertion of misapprehension of legal principles and the prosecutor’s assertion of unfair sentencing by the above court 79No418, and reversed the Defendant’s assertion of unfair sentencing, and subsequently sentenced the Defendant to a suspended sentence of two years and suspension of qualification for

(2) On June 21, 1979, the Defendant waived the right to appeal and the judgment subject to a retrial became final and conclusive on June 21, 1979.

C. On March 31, 2011, the Defendant filed the instant request for reexamination. This Court rendered a decision to commence reexamination (hereinafter “decision to commence reexamination of this case”) on the ground that the Emergency Measure No. 9 on April 24, 2013, was unconstitutional and invalid from the beginning, and thus, rendered a decision to commence reexamination (hereinafter “decision to commence reexamination of this case”) under Article 420 subparag. 5 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the said decision to commence reexamination became final and conclusive as is, on the grounds that there was no legitimate filing of

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles (emergency action No. 9) are the inherent nature of the emergency and provisional nature, and there is no need to maintain such measures under the present condition, and there is no validity. The acts committed by the Defendants in the indictment that they committed in this case are all democratic citizens.