A. Whether the National Security Act was unconstitutional solely on the grounds that the National Security Act was revised as a specialized in the National Assembly for Legislative Activities (negative)

B. Whether the National Security Act’s provision of North Korea as an anti-government organization is inconsistent with the preamble of the Constitution and Articles 4 and 5 of the Constitution, or with the principle of peaceful unification declared by the Republic of Korea (negative)

C. Whether North Korea continues to exist as a sovereign state in the international community, and our government offered a normal conference with the name of the North Korean authority, and it can be determined that North Korea is not an anti-government organization (negative)

D. Whether the National Security Act infringes on the essential contents of the principle of no punishment without law (negative)

(e) Whether an act constitutes Article 7(1) and (3) of the National Security Act that constitutes a committee, etc. for a democratic military strike with awareness of the fact that the government policy funds are objectively transferred and that they are transferred to the enemy (affirmative)

A. Article 6 (1) of the Addenda of the former Constitution promulgated on October 27, 1980 provided a basis provision for granting legislative power to the National Assembly for National Assembly Legislation. Meanwhile, Article 5 of the Addenda of the current Constitution provides that the law at the time of the enforcement of the Constitution shall continue its effect unless it violates the current Constitution, and thus, the so-called continuing effect of the former Act is recognized. Thus, unlike the current Constitution, the reason that the National Security Act was amended by the National Assembly for National Assembly Legislation other than the representative organ of the people cannot be said to be unconstitutional merely because

B. Since the principle of peaceful unification and the principle of international peace declared by the Constitution in Articles 4 and 5 should be pursued under the World War, which is the fundamental liberal democratic order, even in a situation where it is obvious that North Korea still poses a threat to the basic liberal democratic order, the National Security Act is deemed as an anti-government organization and thus, it cannot be deemed as a law inconsistent with the principles of international peace, etc. by deeming North Korea as an anti

C. Article 3 of the Constitution provides that "the territory of the Republic of Korea shall be the Korean Peninsula and its annexed islands," and it cannot be recognized that any state organization facing sovereignty and sovereignty of the Republic of Korea in this area may not be recognized. Therefore, although North Korea continues to exist in the international community as a single sovereign country, it cannot be concluded that North Korea is not an anti-government organization that infringes on the sovereignty and sovereignty of the Republic of Korea by using the name of the North Korean authority and by using the name of the North Korean authority.

D. The concept of each element of crime under the National Security Act, which reasonably interpreted the provision of the National Security Act in light of the purpose of the Act, shall not be deemed to infringe upon the essential contents of the principle of no punishment without the law, in light of the following:

E. It does not merely criticize the government policy, but further, combat police officers are soldiers of strike shock shocks and military readers, which are subordinate to the colonial policy of the U.S. government, and the U.S. Armed Forces is a unified element. The U.S. Armed Forces is bound by the unification. The team ice training is also engaged in nuclear war practice and should be suspended, and it is objectively recognized that the activities of the North Korean government organization, which is an anti-government organization, are in concert with or benefit from the activities of the anti-government organization, and that the above anti-government organization is in benefit of the above anti-government organization, it constitutes Article 7(1) and (3) of the National Security Act.

(b)Article 2(e) of the National Security Act; Articles 7(1), 7(3), and 1(a) of the Addenda to the Constitution; Article 5 of the Addenda to the Constitution; Article 6(1) of the Addenda to the former Constitution; Articles 4 and 5(c) of the Constitution; Article 3(d) of the Constitution; Article 12(1) of the Constitution;

A.B. D. Supreme Court Decision 4292Da48 delivered on September 28, 1961 (Gong1990, 1500). D. Supreme Court Decision 90Do1518 delivered on September 14, 1990 (Gong1990, 2123). Supreme Court Decision 89Hun-Ga113 delivered on April 2, 1990 (Gong1514No21 delivered on June 8, 1990).

Defendant

Defendant

Attorney Doh-ho

Seoul High Court Decision 90No588 delivered on May 25, 1990

The appeal is dismissed.

The forty-nine days of detention days before the final appeal shall be included in the penalty of the original judgment.

As to each ground of appeal:

1. Whether the National Security Act is unconstitutional

Article 6 (1) of the Addenda to the National Security Act promulgated on October 27, 1980 provides that the National Assembly shall exercise its authority on behalf of the National Assembly from the date of the first assembly of the National Assembly under the former Constitution to the date preceding the date of the first assembly of the National Assembly. Meanwhile, according to Article 5 of the Addenda to the current Constitution enacted on October 29, 1987, and enacted since February 25, 1988, the Act at the time of enforcement of the Constitution shall remain in force unless it violates the current Constitution, thereby recognizing the so-called continuing effect of the former Act. Thus, the former Act, which goes against the current Constitution and becomes null and void because it cannot be seen as being inconsistent with the current Constitution, and it cannot be seen that there is no clear violation of the Constitution and the basic order of the National Security Act of the Republic of Korea, even if it was enacted or amended by the Constitution, it cannot be seen that there is no clear violation of the Constitution and the basic order of the National Security Act of the Republic of Korea.

2. Legal principles and violation of the rules of evidence

Examining the contents of the evidence admitted by the court below, the defendant argues that the combat police should be dismissed for the democratization of the police and the fatherland, not just because it criticizes the government policy, but also that the combat police is a spatch shock and spatch spatch spatch spatch spatch spatch spatch spatch spatch spatch spatch spatch spatch spatch spatch spatch spatch spatch spatch spatch spatch spatch, and the spatch spatch spatch spatch spatch spatch spatch spatch spatch spatch.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the appeal shall be dismissed, and 49 days of detention days prior to the judgment after the appeal shall be included in the imprisonment of the court below. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all Justices who reviewed the appeal.

Justices Kim Yong-ju (Presiding Justice)