2015No531 Violation of the National Security Act (Organization, etc. of private organizations), and violation of the National Security Act

(Emarment, rubber, etc.)

1. A;

2. B

3. C.

4. D;

5. E.

6. F;

7. G.

8. H;

9. I

Defendants and Prosecutor

Gangwon-gu (Public prosecution), Kim Sung-dong, and Domina decoration (public trial)

Law Firm K (for all the defendants):

Attorney L

Attorney J (for all the defendants)

Seoul Central District Court Decision 2013Gohap456, 1114(combined) decided January 23, 2015;

1370(Joint Judgment) Judgment

2015, 9,3

Of the judgment below, Defendant F.M. 1 and Defendant B’s 6th Gam 2’s Gam 2’s Gam 2’s Gam 2’s Gam 11, Ga6’s Gam 21, Ga17’s Gam 21, Ga6’s Gam 17’s Gam 17’s Gam 27’s Gam 27’s Gam 16’s Gam 27’s Gam 1, 17’s Gam 2’s Gam 27’s Gam 16’s Gam 27’s Gam 27’s Gam 16’s Gam 17’s Gam 27’s Gam Gam 16’s Gam Gam 16’s Gam Gam 17’s Gam 17’s Ga

However, the execution of each of the above imprisonment for three years for Defendant A and C, for two years for Defendant B, D, E, G, and H, and for Defendant F for one year for one year from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

압수된 유인물(M수련회 강연자료, 2009년 조문정국이후 대중투쟁과 2010년 지방선거의 과제) 1부(서울중앙지방검찰청 2013압제1341호의 증 제4호), 유인물(M 2008년 평가 및 2009년 전망 고민) 1부(같은 청 2013압제1341호의 증 제7호)를 피고인 A로부터, '10월 다섯째 주 사무국회의' 문건 1부(같은 청 2013압제3294호의 증 제24호), '우리당 선군정치의 빛나는 역사에 대하여' 문건 1부(같은 청 2013 압제3294호의 증 제35호), 청년학생들이여 518 정신 계승하여 반미-미군철수 반N당 투쟁에 충분기해 나서자' 문건 1부(같은 청 2013압제3294호의 증 제36호)를 피고인 B로부터, '2013 자주통일운동 사업방향 초안' 문건 6매(같은 청 2013압제4653호의 증 제6호), '2013 자주통일운동 대토론회' 책자 1권(같은 청 2013압제4653호의 증 제21호), '북한 신년사' 1부(같은 청2013압제4653호의 증 제36호)를 피고인 C으로부터, '수렁에 빠진 한국경제와 재벌' 1부(같은 청 2013 압제 3298호의 증 제3호), '21세기 진보적 민주주의' 1부(같은 청 2013압제3298호의 증 제4호), '0 2010년 5기 M 정기총회 자료집' 1권(같은 청 2013압제 3298호의 증 제8호), '2008년 3기 M 정기총회 자료집' 1권(같은 청 2013압제3298호의증 제9호), '2007 상반기 P(2007. 7. 17.) 자료집' 1권(같은 청 2013압제3298호의 증 제11호), '2009 제4회 M 정기총회 자료집' 2권(같은 청 2013압제3298호의 증 제12호), '첫번째 정기총회 M 자료집(2006.5.)' 1권(같은 청 2013압제3298호의 증 제13호)를 피고인 E로부터, '청년 Q' 1권(같은 청 2013압제3295호의 증 제1호), 각 민족의 진로' 총 47권(같은 청 2013압제3295호의 증 제2 내지 48호), '남북정상회담의 성과와 6.15시대를 빛내기 위한 청년학생의 역할과 과제' 1권(같은 청 2013압제3295호의 증 제51호),} 광복 63주년 기념 FQ' 1권(같은 청 2013압제 3295호의 증 제52호), '한반도 평화체제와 주한미군문제 해결 방안' 1권(같은 청 2013압제3295호의 증 제53호), 'M 2006.5. 첫 번째 정기총회 자료집' 1권(같은 청 2013압제3295호의 증 제61호), '2008년 3기 M 정기총회 자료집' 1권(같은 청 2013압제3295호의 증 제64호), '2009 제4차 M 정기총회 자료집' 1권(같은 청 2013압제3295호의 증 제66호), '이 제5차 정기총회 자료집' 1권(같은청 2013압제3295호의 증 제67호)을 피고인 G로부터, '615시대 통일운동의 과제' 1권(같은 청 2013압제3296호의 증 제1호), 파일(2006년 M 등) 1권(같은 청 2013압제 3296호의 증 제6호), 파일(8.15 61주년에 맞는 비상한 정세를 자주평화민족대단결의 총공세로 맞이하자 등) 1권(같은 청 2013압제3296호의 증 제7호)을 피고인 H으로부터 각 몰수한다. 피고인 I의 항소 및 검사의 ① 피고인 A의 2008. 6. 9. '6.15공동선언과 10.4 선언 관철을 위한 청년학생 선언' 참가, 2008. 4. 30. '제5차 S대표자회의 공동결의문' 반포, 2009. 1. 29. '2008년 3기 M 평가서' 제작·반포, 이메일을 이용하여 '청년위] 청년운동 강화단결 토론자료'라는 제목의 이메일 및 'aaa'라는 제목의 첨부파일, 원심판결 별지 범죄일람표(9) 중 순번 1, 2, 6, 8 기재 각 이적표현물 소지, 거주지를 이용한 '2010년 M총회준비위원회 3차 회의' 문건 소지로 인한 각 국가보안법위반(찬양·고무등)의 점에 대한 무죄부분, ② 피고인 B의 2008. 6. 9. '6.15공동선언과 10.4 선언 관철을 위한 청년 학생 선언' 참가, 피고인 B의 이메일 계정을 이용한 이적표현물 소지 중 원심판결 별지 범죄일람표(2) 순번 1, 3, 4, 7 내지 9, 11 기재 이적표현물 소지로 인한 각 국가보안법위반(찬양, 고무등)의 점에 대한 무죄부분, ③ 피고인 C, D, E의 2008. 6. 9. '6.15 공동선언과 10.4 선언 관철을 위한 청년학생 선언' 참가로 인한 각 국가보안법위반(찬 양·고무등)의 점에 대한 무죄부분, ④ 피고인 G의 2008. 6. 9. '6.15공동선언과 10.4 선언 관철을 위한 청년학생선언' 참가, 거주지를 이용한 '자주통일의 노래 조국과 청춘 (노래집)' 소지로 인한 각 국가보안법위반(찬양·고무등)의 점, ⑤ 피고인 A, G, H의 국가보안법위반(이적단체의 구성등)의 점에 대한 면소부분, ⑥ 피고인 I에 대한 각 항소를 모두 기각한다.

1. Scope of the judgment of this court;

Of the facts charged in the instant case, the lower court rendered a judgment on April 15, 201, on the grounds that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor regarding Defendant D’s distribution of “the present and unification of the Korean society” and Defendant E’s present and uniform acquisition of the Korean society on April 15, 2011 was insufficient to recognize the distribution and acquisition of each National Security Act by itself. The prosecutor appealed that the entire acquitted and acquitted portion in the petition of appeal is the scope of appeal, but the prosecutor did not submit specific grounds for appeal regarding the acquitted portion, and made it clear that the appellate court did not file an appeal on the second trial date. Accordingly, this part of the judgment of the lower court became final and conclusive. Accordingly, the scope of a party member’s trial is limited to the remainder other than this part of the judgment below.

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendants

1) The judgment of the court below that recognized M as a dual organization is erroneous in the misunderstanding of facts or in the misunderstanding of legal principles, even though M cannot be deemed as a dual organization in light of the nature of higher-level organization to which the "M" (hereinafter referred to as "M"), relationship with M and higher organizations, M has engaged in many activities as to pending issues in the South Korean society, and M cannot be deemed as a dual organization.

2) As to the transfer of the enemy

In light of the following circumstances, although each of the following acts cannot be seen as an act of immigration assistance, the judgment of the court below is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles or misconception of legal principles.

A) The 3, 4, and 5th regular meeting of M is not a dual organization, and the major contents of each ordinary meeting’s data collection are included, etc. do not actively express the intention of responding to and responding to North Korea’s activities.

B) The contents of Defendant A’s participation 2008 CE, WF of the Southern Limit of the Z (hereinafter “WF”), 2008 General Assembly (the first representative meeting), R (hereinafter “R”) 3 DD and 2009 CE cannot be deemed to be a combination of North Korea’s attention and assertion, and it cannot be deemed that Defendant A actively respondeded to and responded to the act to the extent that Defendant A participated.

C) The third third representative meeting in which Defendant C participated is not an exercise that is familiar with North Korea. In addition, the fact that Defendant C participated in the representative of Defendant C cannot be deemed to have actively respondeded to the above event.

3) In light of the following circumstances, although the Defendants could not be deemed to possess pro-enemy contents, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles or misunderstanding the legal principles regarding pro-enemy contents.

(1) The expression merely leads to the question of North Korea’s attention and argument.

subsection (b) of this section.

(2) It is unreasonable to regard the expressive materials that are widely disseminated through the Internet portal, etc., such as the "North Korean History" held by Defendant C in 2013 (the possession of Defendant C) as pro-enemy materials.

(3) Defendant E did not possess a “non-exploitious fluorial fluorial forum” of the history of the anti-exploitation.

(4) The Defendants did not possess materials for the purpose of immigration purposes. In particular, the Defendants, among the expressive materials held by Defendant B, “with respect to the history of our military politics light or history,” took place on the Internet for the purpose of academic research in the course of supporting them from around 2006 to North Korean graduate schools of the CAC in 2007, and thus, it is difficult to recognize the dual purpose.

(5) Although the expression on the Internet e-mail or car page does not constitute “documents, paintings, and other representations” under Article 7(5) of the National Security Act, there is an error of law by misapprehending the legal principles in the judgment below recognizing it.

4) Unreasonable sentencing

The sentencing (for defendant A: imprisonment of two years, three years of probation, suspension of qualifications, two years of suspension of qualifications, confiscation, defendant B: imprisonment of one and half years of suspension of qualifications, two years of suspension of qualifications, one year and six months of suspension of qualifications, one year and six months of confiscation, defendant C: imprisonment of two years of suspension of qualifications, three years of suspension of qualifications, three years of suspension of qualifications, two years of suspension of qualifications, two years of suspension of qualifications, one year and six months of suspension of qualifications, one year and six months of suspension of qualifications, one year and six months of suspension of qualifications, two years of suspension of qualifications, one year and six months of suspension of qualifications, one year and six months of suspension of qualifications, one year and six months of suspension of qualifications, one year and six months of suspension of qualifications, suspension of qualifications, one year and six months, suspension of qualifications, defendant H: imprisonment of one year, two years of suspension of qualifications, one year and one year of suspension of qualifications, one year and one year, suspension of qualifications, and one year).

(b) Prosecutors;

1) As to the acquittal of Defendant A, G, H, and I’s organization of an immigration organization

A) It is reasonable to view that M was constituted at the time when the general meeting was held (M’s members were aware of the date of formation by themselves as of July 17, 2006), and that the organization of and joining the dual organization should be deemed as continuous crime. As such, the statute of limitations has not run until the Defendants formed M and completed its activities.

C) Nevertheless, the decision of the court below that acquitted the above Defendants on the ground that M was formed on July 17, 2004 in the process of preparing for the formation of organization, and the crime of forming and joining the organization was immediately committed, was erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles and erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles.

2) As to the transfer of the enemy

A) In light of the details and overall context of Defendant A, B, C, D, E, G, and I’s 6.15 Joint Declaration to achieve the 10.4 Declaration, and the 6.15 Joint Declaration and the 10.4 Declaration to achieve the 10.4 Declaration, the court below acquitted the Defendants on this part of the charges on the ground that it is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles or misapprehension of legal principles on the facts, on the grounds that it is difficult to recognize the suitability of the 196.15 Joint Declaration and the 10.4 Declaration to achieve the 10.4 Declaration.

B) The participation of Defendant A, B, C, D, E, F, G, and H in the sixth ordinary meeting

Considering the various arguments made at the above general meeting, the Defendants were not guilty of this part of the facts charged on the ground that it is difficult for the Defendants to recognize the suitability of the content of the decision adopted at the general meeting of shareholders, and there is an error of misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles.

C) Defendant A’s participation in the second representative meeting on October 11, 2008, the second representative meeting on March 21, 2009, and the first representative meeting on March 21, 2009

The judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant, even though the defendant actively respondeded to and responded to this part of the facts charged, is erroneous in the misunderstanding of facts.

D) Defendant C’s holding of the 7 R7th Session on July 18, 2009 and participating in the 8th Session on March 27, 2010.

Although Defendant C took part in the above representative meeting, it is insufficient to recognize it. The judgment of the court below which acquitted Defendant C on this part of the facts charged is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts.

3) Each of the documents produced, distributed, and held by the Defendants, such as the following subparagraphs (A), (b), and (3) of the list of crimes (9) Nos. 2 of the judgment below among the multiple e-mails, as shown in the following subparagraphs, (d), (f), (g), and (h) of the list of crimes attached to the judgment below, are consistent with the theory of the revolution of the North Korea, or propaganda or instigate the contents thereof, or concert with the North Korean state’s attention and the head of the North Korea, thereby causing a serious danger to the fundamental order of free democracy, and inspected the accompanying documents by receiving the remaining e-mail under subparagraph (e). However, it is difficult to recognize the suitability of each of the above documents, or it is insufficient to recognize that Defendant A and B received the e-mail and inspected the accompanying documents. Thus, the court below erred in the misapprehension of legal principles and misapprehension of legal principles.

A) Distribution of Defendant A’s ’Joint Resolution of the 5th S representative Meeting’ on April 30, 2008

B) Production and distribution of Defendant A’s 3 M/M evaluation statement on January 29, 2009

C) Possession of pro-enemy contents using Defendant A’s e-mail

D) Possession of the third meeting of the General Assembly Preparation Committee of 2010, using Defendant A’s residence

E) Possession of pro-enemy contents using Defendant B’s e-mail [e-mail as indicated in Nos. 1 through 4, 6 through 11, 14, 16, and 17 of the List of Crimes Attached to the Judgment of the court below]

F) On February 27, 2011, Defendant C, D, and E’s production and distribution of “data collection at the 6th regular meeting of M”; Defendant E’s possession of “2011 by means of the medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium

G) Possession of a singing country of self-government unification using Defendant G’s residence, and of a singing country of self-government unification

H) The 6th course curriculum using Defendant I’s medium medium medium: The 6th course curriculum of war and peace in the Korean Peninsula and the 7th course curriculum: Possession of 'the direction and task of peace in the Korean Peninsula'.

3. Judgment on the grounds of appeal by the Defendants

A. Determination on the aptitude of M

1) The judgment of the court below

The lower court determined that M constitutes a dual organization, in light of the following contents claimed by M, M’s activities, and the behavior patterns and thought orientations of the core members, and that M does not significantly differ from the assertion or activity of an organization that recognized the aptitude in the existing court, and that M constitutes a dual organization, in addition to the activity patterns, thought patterns, etc. of core staff members.

A) The contentM asserted by M represents that it is a youth organization that realizes the 6.15 Joint Declaration of 6.15 Joint Declaration. However, examining the contents of M’s assertion in detail, including the following: (i) the praise and propaganda of North Korea’s military politics officially published by M; (ii) the safeguard against the three-year nuclear attack; (iii) the safeguard against North Korea’s human rights issues and international issues; (iv) the unilateral criticism against the CDA government related to the astronomical crisis; (v) the competition between South and North Korea; (vi) the increase of the risk of war on the Korean Peninsula; (vi) the responsibility of the division; and (iii) the pro-Japanese forces in South and North Korea supporting it solely, without excluding North Korea as obstacles to the unification and peace; and (vi) the establishment of the Korean government, an anti-government organization, a democratic society, and an anti-government organization; and (vi) the establishment of an independent anti-government organization, an anti-government organization.

B) M’s activities

(1) At around 2005, M in connection with a higher-level organization and external activities was subscribed to WF, upon the decision of the WF conference, and became a member of the said organization, through discussions and voting of its members, and was engaged in activities as a member of the said organization. In addition, the court has actively participated in various events organized by the said higher-level organization, events organized by BK (hereinafter referred to as “BK”), and assemblies in M in order to strengthen the political capabilities by considering the 2007 large-sized vessels as the major mechanism of the anti-united power including the U.S. and the starting point of the Nowon-gu for autonomous and democratic government formation, as the starting point of the autonomous and democratic government formation.

(2) In addition to the annual general meeting held as well as the annual general meeting of members, the internal operational MF continued to study and discuss the documents of this aptitude at the events held by M, such as the “P”, the education of new members, and the workshop. The executive officers of M have first taught the above documents at the meeting of executive members (such as the meeting of policy bureau, etc.) and sought the method of the education of members or the pertinent business. These documents were prepared by R, X, FB, CB, etc., most of which are superior organizations, and contain contents identical to North Korea’s assertion.

C) Both BB, Defendant A, and C, who were the former representative of M with the behavior pattern and ideology pattern of the core members, had the record of having been punished by the violation of the National Security Act due to U-state activities, or had been punished by U-state activities. Besides, as shown in the facts constituting the crime above, the core members, who actually led M organization, had the record of violating the National Security Act in the past or have been engaged in the executive activities in a pro-enemy organization. The core members are possessing, learning and distributing pro-enemy activities in North Korea. The core members are carrying, learning and distributing pro-enemy activities in North Korea, and a lot of quoted comments are posted on the M-W bulletin board with the appointment of the executive members in M. In most cases, most of them were made in the name of the dual organizations mentioned above, and the contents are unilaterally defensive and defended by North Korea, and are

2) Determination of the immediate deliberation

Article 7(1) and (3) of the National Security Act provides that, even if an organization did not carry out activities of anti-government organizations such as praises, rubbers, and concerts with those of anti-government organizations, if such organization actually carries out such activities as the purpose of its organization’s communication with anti-government organizations, and it is recognized that the organization’s actual activities were likely to do harm to the nation’s existence and security or democratic fundamental order, such organization should be regarded as a so-called “government organization” (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2010Do1189, Jul. 23, 2010). Thus, the lower court’s assertion that the organization’s activities of anti-government organizations were carried out in its name or bylaws with the aim of pro-enemy activities of anti-government organizations, or that it was carried out by North Korea with the aim of forming a democratic and anti-government organizations. However, the lower court’s assertion that the organization’s activities of anti-government organizations were carried out by North Korea’s legitimate defense or evidence is without merit.

B. Determination as to the act of immigration assistance

1) Defendant A, B, C, D, G, and I’s third general meeting of shareholders, Defendant A, C, D, E, G, and I’s fourth general meeting of shareholders, and the Defendants’ fifth general meeting of shareholders.

A) The judgment of the court below

In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, the lower court determined that the Defendants held the 3, 4, and 5th ordinary meeting of MM was an act of asserting the same content as the propaganda, inciting, and the activities of North Korea, an anti-government organization, and that the Defendants responded to and was an act of responding to the activities of an anti-government organization.

(1) According to the above general meeting’s data collection, M basically grasps the world situation surrounding the Korean Peninsula as the opposite to North-U.S., and the U.S. has expressed desire to control the Korean Peninsula through parodism, Stateism, and unilateralism, and the South Korean government is subordinate to the U.S. and is in front of the anti-North Korean book. In particular, the U.S. and the U.S. forces in the U.S. and the South Korea are regarded as suppressing the progress of the unification and the non-obviousness in order to publicly announce the pro rata organization system. Such understanding is basically the same as the perspective that the anti-government organization, which is an anti-government organization, regards the U.S. and South Korea, and the perspective that grasps the situation surrounding the anti-government organization.

(2) The main contents asserted in the above general meeting of shareholders are consistent with the contents that North Korea has continuously asserted in the old and new common theory or the South-North Revolution theory by emphasizing the solidarity of North Korea, such as anti-U.S. and U.S. military training, opposition to the Korea-U.S. military training, the removal of the National Security Act, the awareness and organization of youth groups, and the solidarity of inventive force, or the defense for nuclear possession.

(3) As alleged in its claim, M has decided to participate in assemblies related to private life and other social issues, such as the Korea-U.S. Free Trade Agreement (FTA), unemployment issues, wage issues, university enrollment fees, etc. However, the ultimate purpose of M is to concentrate on the power of strike and to find out a proactive force and withdraw usfk from the Republic of Korea.

B) Determination of the immediate deliberation

According to Article 7 (1) of the National Security Act, the term "personal assistance" refers to the act of responding to and joining the activities of anti-government organizations or their members or those who were ordered to join such organizations by asserting the same contents as the propaganda, inciting, and committing an act consistent with it (Supreme Court Decision 2001Do4328 delivered on September 23, 2003). The above circumstances presented by the court below and the following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below: ① The assertion of M is an assertion that North Korea is identical or actively defending it with that of the United States and South Korea as seen above; ② the defendants have determined the business plan of M for one year based on the analysis of the situation presented by each of the above North Korea at each of the above assembly; ③ the defendants join the superior organization in the name of M as seen earlier, and participate in the event or assembly, etc., the defendants' assertion that the court below erred in the misapprehension of legal principles as to M& 3, 44, and 500.

2) Defendant A’s 2008 CE, WF 2008 General Assembly (the first representative meeting), R 3 D, 2009 CE participation

Considering the following circumstances that can be recognized by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the court below, it is reasonable to deem that the objection of each of the above events was sufficiently recognized, and Defendant A actively participated in the above events with the knowledge that it may endanger the existence and security of the State or democratic fundamental order, and actively expressed an intention to respond to the activities of anti-government organizations, etc. - pathy.

A) The main contents discussed, study, and claimed in each of the above events are the same contents as claimed by North Korea, or North Korea, such as anti-U.S. dollars and U.S. military training, the opposition to the Korea-U.S. Joint Military Training, the removal of the National Security Act, and the obsive power’s solidarity, as seen earlier, and it is not significantly different from the previous position that M has continuously maintained.

B) The '2008 CE' hosted by X-R.U has already been recognized as an act of transfer from the court. The Defendant A written an official notice on December 31, 2007 and on the Roy World bulletin, stating that the members who can be seen to have newly amended the name of the 'FJ', which had been previously done, will participate in the 2008 CE, and subsequently, the members, together with BR and DT members, participated in the said CE and contributed to increasing the prices of the above events, and adopted a resolution.

C) Defendant A, as a representative of M on February 28, 2008, participated in the “WF 2008 Assembly (the first Assembly)” in the capacity of M, and was engaged in the activities to see the festivals sent at the North Korean Youth Students’ Subcommittee and the overseas liaison conference, and to adopt a resolution and a resolution on various matters. Thereafter, the Defendant posted a letter of reporting the results of the above event on the Mawy World bulletin Board, and also attached the data collection of the Representative’s meeting.

D) From February 23, 2008 to February 24, 2008, Defendant A participated in the quiz competitions, lectures, literary performances, and next one-half-day event leading to the quizary campaign meeting. Since then, Defendant A posted a notice stating the result of the above event on the quith bulletin board, and attached DNA data collection.

E) On January 9, 2009, prior to the opening of 2009 CE, Defendant A posted a written explanation of 2009 CE on the bulletin board of Mypted, which was prior to the opening of the call, and carried out a preliminary meeting by publicly announcing major matters, Defendant A participated in the said CE event along with the members of DT, BR, and DU. Defendant A actively participated in various events, such as making a speech at a political meeting for the crushingization of public peace during the said event.

3) The participation of Defendant C in the third representative meeting of Defendant C’s 7 R

A) The lower court determined that, at the third representative meeting of the said R7 period, the Defendant participated in the said event with the knowledge of the fact that it may endanger the national existence and security or democratic fundamental order, in view of the following: (a) praises North Korea’s pre-military politics and the strong nationalism, and that it is identical to North Korea’s view; and (b) the method of strike presented as a solution is identical to that of North Korea; (c) as such, the reason behind the foregoing event is sufficiently recognized; and (d) the Defendant participated in the said meeting as the representative of M; and (e) the background leading up to the Defendant’s participation in the said event, etc., the Defendant was aware

B) The following circumstances acknowledged by the court below based on the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, that is, the above meeting includes a "Gu office business promotion campaign", but this is included in the process of the strike that "it should spread widely the CD regime's strike that is going against the front line of the youth and the youth's specific demands." Thus, the above agenda cannot be seen as the main contents of the above event. Thus, if the above agenda was discussed in the above event, and it cannot be said that it cannot be said that there is no reason to believe that the suitability of the agenda is lost, the judgment of the court below is just, and there is no error of law by mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles. Accordingly, this part of the defendant C's assertion is without merit.

1) Relevant legal principles

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 basic order, which are protected by the law of the National Security Act. Whether the expressive materials have such an objection should be determined by taking into account not only the whole contents of the expressive materials, but also 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 situation at

The crime of Article 7(5) of the National Security Act is a so-called crime of producing, importing, copying, distributing, selling, or acquiring documents, paintings, or other representations for the purpose of committing a pro-enemy act under Articles 1, 3, and 7(4). The purpose of the crime is to establish a crime, and it is clear that it is a so-called crime of pro-enemy. The purpose of the crime is an excessive illegal element for the purpose of crime, which is separate from intention. Thus, even if an actor knowingly committed an act under paragraph (5), the element of the crime is not satisfied unless the intended act is recognized. Furthermore, the prosecutor bears the burden of proving the facts constituting the element of the crime prosecuted in a criminal trial. Since the actor bears the burden of proving that he/she committed an act under paragraph (5) with the knowledge that he/she was a pro-enemy act, the mere fact that the actor committed an act under paragraph (5) shall not be presumed to have an intent to commit an pro-enemy act. In this case, if there is no direct evidence to prove that the actor committed an pro-enemy act, taking into account various circumstances.

2) Determination on the aptitude of the content

According to the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below, each of the documents recognized as pro-enemy contents of the court below follows the following arguments and activities of North Korea, such as the dissolution of the system of the Korea-U.S.A.A.A. military union, the opposition to the Korea-U.S. military training, the abolition of the National Security Act, the abolition of the National Security Act, and the pressure of anti-U.S. and pro-U.S.-U.-U.S.-U.-U.S.-U.-U.S.-U.-U.S.-U.-U.S.-U.-U.-U.S. human rights issues, ⑤ distortion of North Korea's human rights issues, ⑤ the principal ideology, military politics, the obsting of the strong-U.S.-U.-U.S.-U.-U.-U.S.-U.-U.-U.-U.S.-U.-U.-U.S.-U.-U.-U.-U.S.-U.-U.-U.P.

3) Determination as to Defendant C’s possession of Defendant C’s “North Korean History” in 2013

In full view of all the circumstances indicated in the record, the following facts are revealed: (a) the expression of North Korea in 2013 by itself praises the North Korean socialist system; (b) AV, AW, and GU; and (c) instigates the North Korean Revolution. Such content is active and aggressive that threatens the existence and security of the Republic of Korea and democratic fundamental order; and (c) thus, it is sufficient to recognize it as pro-enemy pro-enemy pro-enemy under the National Security Act. Furthermore, in light of the degree of pro-enemy expression of North Korea in 2013, the Defendant appears to have sufficiently recognized this aptitude; (d) the Defendant was acting as the representative of M who is a pro-enemy organization for two years; and (e) there was a history of using a superior organization’s pro-enemy organization for the purpose of educating and using the members; and (e) the above expressive materials cannot be denied solely on the ground that they were widely disseminated through the Internet portal, etc., this part of the Defendant C’s assertion is without merit.

4) Determination as to the possession of Defendant E’s “Defendant E’s history, fluorical fluoral Span,”

In light of the following circumstances that can be recognized by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the trial court: ① the above documents were seized as part of the Korean economy and repact (No. 3298 No. 3298 of the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office) located within the defendant's residence; ② there are several documents printed on the back of the above documents; ② there are several documents do not fit the order; while there are several documents, the open square is a single document, and the contents of the documents are naturally connected, and ③ the subsequent documents were dissatched by each document, and the subsequent documents were dissatched to be used as a back. In light of these circumstances, the above documents are deemed to have been dissatched to have been dissatched for the purpose of using the back documents as the back documents. In light of the fact that the above documents were printed out as a historical letter of the dissatched history of the defendant's residence, the above documents were not sufficient for the purpose of the defendant's subsequent 20 years ago.

5) Determination as to the assertion of reason for transfer

In addition to the circumstances that M is a pro-enemy organization, the following circumstances can be acknowledged by evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below and the court below. In other words, the Defendants’ assertion that pro-enemy materials held by the Defendants are materials of other pro-enemy organizations that are directly or indirectly connected to M, and ② the Defendants are educated with pro-enemy materials held by the Defendants, discussed, decided the contents of M’s activities, or induced the Defendants to participate in the pro-enemy act by posting pro-enemy materials, etc., the pro-enemy contents can be fully recognized. Thus, this part of the Defendants’ assertion is without merit.

In addition, in light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the court below as evidence, i.e., Defendant B’s accession to M on October 20, 2006, which was the time when Defendant B acquired the above documents; ② Defendant B had asserted that he praiseed and advertised North Korea’s military politics; ③ Defendant B had been elected as the education source of M; and Defendant B had been engaged in the process of processing and distributing materials received from a superior organization, etc.; even if Defendant B acquired the above documents in the course of supporting the graduate school of North Korea, Defendant B had possession of the above documents for this purpose. Thus, Defendant B’s assertion on this part is without merit.

6) Determination as to the representation of an electronic document

In light of the above, Article 7 (5) of the National Security Act provides that "documents, paintings, and other representations" means of illegal act, and it seems that it is basically a comprehensive provision on the medium or means of communication with the nature or function of communication of intent, and does not focus on the form of medium. ② It is not a tangible object but an electronic information delivery by wireless information and communication, and even if it falls under electronic information, the document has the inherent function of delivering ideas or intentions using letters and symbols to others. ③ It is necessary to regulate the electronic mail, electronic document, etc. by taking into account the fact that the computer is in charge of the function and role of the material paper as a substitute for the material paper document. Therefore, it is reasonable to interpret that not only the material but also the electronic mail and electronic document, etc. are included in the "documents, paintings, and other goods" under Article 7 (5) of the National Security Act. Therefore, the defendants' assertion that the electronic document is not indicated in the Internet or e-mail is not justified.

4. Determination on the prosecutor's grounds for appeal

A. Determination as to the formation timing of M

1) Summary of the facts charged

On April 6, 2004, four members, including BB, BA, BB, and BC, who participated in the activities of U in 200, agreed to organize a new youth movement organization in line with the claim of 6.15 joint declarations held by North Korea, and then appointed BB, temporary general office, BC as of April 17, 2004, and first GH as of June 17, 2004, among six members of the above organization including B, Z, GF, BC, and GG, the first GH was held to establish a new youth movement organization, and the first GH was held one time a week, focusing on the necessity of the organization exceeding the limit of the existing youth conference, the newness of youth movement, and the second GH was held on April 23, 2004. Accordingly, members, including BB, such as Seoul, holding a new youth organization, and holding the 5th GH of 204, 204, 2054.14.

Defendant A, G, H, and I joined the FW Act, which is the above preparatory group. On May 21, 2006, at the 309 office of DM University Venture Small and Medium Enterprise Center 309 located in Dongjak-gu, Seoul on May 21, 2006, Defendant A, G, H, and I attended the first regular meeting of MM held in which 50 members are present, and the name of organization is determined as MM, and adopted “M rules” which stipulate the organization system such as general assembly, operating committee, representatives, secretariats, and reflects, and completed the formation of the organization, such as the first representative, policy director-general, finance director-general, organization director-general, and director-general.

As a result, Defendant A, G, H, and I conspired with 50 members of the National Security Act on May 21, 2006, which would endanger the existence and security of the nation or democratic fundamental order, and thus constitute a dual organization M with the purpose of manufacturing it on the North Korean Revolution route, such as anti-U.S.A.M., 6.15 Joint Declaration and 10.4 Declaration, 6.15 Joint Declaration, and 10.4 Declaration, the realization of the peace system of the Korean Peninsula without the armed forces, the sustainable liquidation of the Korea-U.S. Union, the establishment of independent democratic government, and the National Security Elimination.

2) The judgment of the court below

In full view of the following circumstances recognized by the records of the instant case, the lower court rendered a judgment to dismiss each of the facts charged pursuant to Article 326 subparag. 3 of the Criminal Procedure Act, since it is reasonable to deem that the dual organization M was constituted on July 18, 2004, since the statute of limitations for the prosecution against Defendant A, G, H, and I (the composition, etc. of a dual organization) is calculated from July 18, 2004. The public prosecution of the instant case was instituted on May 16, 2013 (the case of Defendant A), and December 12, 2013 (the case of Defendant G, H, and I) since it is obvious that the statute of limitations has expired due to the record that each of the instant public prosecution was filed on May 16, 2013 (the case of Defendant G, H, and I).

A) From July 17, 2004 to the 18th day of the same month, MM was organized by 40 members at the time, and 27 of them attended the above MM and read the 'Misry' and sign up the FX, the representative and executive organization. Then, the 'Misymology' was the basis for enacting M's rules.

B) The FX, which was approved in MM organization, passed a resolution on the invitation of members, education for new members, public projects, etc. of M, was an agency that performs each of its duties, and there was a total of 8 FX (including the club hall) such as public relations FX, organizationalFX, policyFX, culturalFX, practiceFX, finance X, and club management. The name of FX was continuously used until the first ordinary general meeting, and thereafter the name was changed to the secretariat, educational bureau, policy bureau, planning bureau, etc., but there was no substantial change in the authority and duties of executive members and the contents of its activities.

C) After the first FX conference was convened, the first FX conference was discussed about the preparation of the anti-terrorism conference, and the proposal for the reorganization was finalized on October 2004 through the nineth FX conference. According to the plan for the reorganization, the "Ma's regional organization" was created, and four Bans began with the regular anti-terrorism conference in November of the same year, and completed the election of the head of the Ban.

D) The letters listed in the M M MM w wd bulletin board, stating as follows: “I will prepare the FW’s periodical system and maintain the F Q Q to be the price for the 2005 unification year,” “I declare the FW’s official formation: FW’s objective: FW’s objective; “I will declare the FW’s formal formation; 11th after the 11th day, M I will form a formal organization.” At the time, M members were deemed to have been aware of M M as the official formation formula of an organization.

E) Since July 2005, M members participated in the opposing assembly for the extension of Pyeongtaek-si U.S. military base which continues to be held in M in the name of M, and was already participating in the first general meeting of M prior to the beginning of the first general meeting of M by participating in the assembly on September 1 of the same year.

F) On August 17, 2005, M joined WF, a superior organization, and was engaged in activities in connection with senior organizations, such as dispatching members to the third S representative Meeting held from December 17 to 18 of the same year.

G) Since June 2004, M began to collect membership fees from its members and the automatic transfer (cms) payment method that can be chosen from 10,000 to 30,000 won was enforced from March 2, 2006, when the first general meeting of shareholders took place.

H) Since 2005, M continued 'P', which is an educational culture business for its members, and continued 'P' business since 2007 and 2008.

I) According to the above circumstances, M is reasonable to deem that it has the characteristic as a continuing combination with the dual purpose and the common system at the time from July 17 to 18, 2004. Moreover, in light of the following: (a) the purpose and route of organization, the members, the composition of staff staff, the organizational structure, the organization’s activities inside and outside of the country are basically maintained without any change; and (b) there is no circumstance or case where special ideological conversion, organizational purpose, and change of the routes are required before and after the first ordinary general meeting held on May 21, 2006; and (c) there is no substantial difference between FW and M; and (d) it is difficult to see that the above two organizations are independent of the above two organizations because it is continuity of organization’s activities (However, it appears that the objective and the route of organization can be operated more systematically and systematically than through the ordinary general meeting on May 21, 2006.)

3) Determination of the immediate deliberation

A) Relevant legal principles

For the purpose of Article 7 (3) of the National Security Act, the term "organization of a pro rata organization" means an organization formed in order to carry out such an act with the awareness that the member's intended act may objectively be an interest of an anti-government organization. In this case, it does not require an awareness of the purpose of pro-government organization to benefit an anti-government organization. In addition, an organization established by the purpose of crime is a continuous combination formed with the common purpose that many and specified persons commit a certain crime, and has a minimum leading system (see Supreme Court Decision 91Do212, Apr. 23, 1991). Meanwhile, the time when the establishment of an pro-enemy organization under Article 7 (3) of the National Security Act is established is not an expression of the nature of the organization, but it is a continuous combination with the common system equipped with such an organization for such purpose (see Supreme Court Decisions 97Do395, Jul. 3, 198; 200Do395, Apr. 23, 1998).

B) Determination

In light of the above-mentioned legal principles, a thorough examination of the records of this case was conducted on July 17, 2004 with respect to Defendant G, H, and I who joined the preparation group of M prior to its formation, and the prosecution for this part of the facts charged was conducted after the lapse of seven years from the statute of limitations from the above point of view, it is reasonable that Defendant A joined M on June 20, 2005, but he was prosecuted for this part of the facts charged, and it is obvious that Defendant A was prosecuted for this part of the facts charged after the lapse of seven years from the point of June 20, 2005. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below that acquitted Defendant G, H, and I was just, and there is no error of law by misunderstanding facts or misunderstanding legal principles as otherwise pointed out by the prosecutor. Therefore, this part of the prosecutor’s assertion is without merit.

C. With respect to immigration assistance

1) The participation of Defendant A, B, C, D, E, G, and I in the youth student declaration

A) Summary of the facts charged

M The chief executive officer C participated in the WF and the 5th S representative Meeting held in the Geumsan from April 26, 2008 to April 28, 2008.

At the above meeting, the representatives of the North Korean Youths Council adopted the 5th S representative Meeting Resolution, and the main contents are as follows.

We will thoroughly observe the principle of nationalism in the 5th Congress's resolution of the 5th Congress. The 1st Congress's resolution is a sign of nationalism, peace, unity, and unification with the 1st nationalism as a life line, and a sign of the 1st nationalism in the 1st national unification movement for young students. We will strengthen the 5th National Assembly's wrong attempts to promote the 5th national unity and to return the 6th national unification era. Second, we will keep up with the 15th Joint Declaration and 10.4th national war against the inside and outside Korea. We will see the 10th National Assembly's 6th National Assembly's 1st century and the 10.6th National Assembly's 6th National Assembly's 5th National Assembly's 6th National Assembly's 5th National Assembly's 6th National Assembly's 5th National Assembly's 196th National Assembly's 5th National Assembly's 196th National Assembly's 10th National Assembly's 10th National Assembly's Ma.

By October 4, 200, the Joint Declaration of 6.15 and the Joint Movement Period for Youth Students to accomplish the Declaration of 10.4 and the Declaration of 6.15 and the 10.4 Declaration will be more concentrated on the major points of this period.

WF decided to carry out a declaration movement of its affiliated organizations by the detailed action of the contents of the above resolution, and on June 13, 2008, set up a plan for the announcement of the joint signature declaration and carried it out to its affiliated organizations.

Accordingly, on June 8, 2008, Defendant A, as a member organization of WF, has held the 7th M steering committee in the presence of the members such as the FK of the first Ban, the 2nd Ban G, the 3rd Ban FL, and the 5th Ban FM at the M office located in Jongno-gu Seoul, Jongno-gu, Seoul, and decided to organize the text of the 7th Declaration on June 10, 2008 by discussing the 6.15, and the 10th Declaration on June 10, 2008. The defendant C, as the head of the MM, posted the above 10th Declaration on June 9, 2008, along with the above 10th Declaration on June 8, 2008, and signed the 16th Declaration on June 20, 2008: The above 16th Declaration on June 17, 2007, Defendant A posted the 1257th Declaration on the above website, and Defendant C1214th of the same e-day.

6.15 Joint Declarations and the 10.4 Declarations for young students to accomplish;

The Republic of Korea does not seem to implement the Korean Joint Declaration 6.15, and it takes the so-called 3,00 North Korea policy on the routes of the 6.1st five North Korea policy, and our young students are now prone to the large era of inter-Korean relations, and have expressed serious concerns over the development of inter-Korean relations and the national peace prosperity. The 6.15 Joint Declaration and 10.4 Declaration are to develop inter-Korean relations and to achieve the 15th National Assembly's 6.6th anniversary of the 15th anniversary of the 15th National Security Act, the 15th anniversary of the 10th anniversary of the 10th anniversary of the 15th anniversary of the 10th anniversary of the 10th anniversary of the 6th anniversary of the 6th anniversary of the 10th anniversary of the 10th anniversary of the 10th anniversary of the 15th anniversary of the 10th anniversary of the 10th anniversary of the 15th anniversary of the 10th Declaration.6th anniversary of the 15th Declaration.

This is the contents of the North Korea's publicity and inciting North Korea, such as the 6.15 Joint Declaration and 10.4 Declaration under 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 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.

As a result, Defendant A, C, D, E, G, and I knowingly acted in concert with the above operating members, which may endanger the national existence and security or democratic fundamental order, and thus would endanger the unification power of North Korea, which is an anti-government organization, 6.15 Joint Declaration, the implementation of the National Security Act, and the abolition of the National Security Act.

B) The judgment of the court below

① Although the above youth student declaration contains a part similar to the assertion of North Korea, such as abolition of the National Security Act and the unification of a foreign organization, the entire contents must be able to achieve unification by examining the spirit of 6.15 Joint Declaration and 10.4 Declaration, and it is judged that the two-Korean young people will make efforts to gather and advance efforts, and that it is a fundamental declaration expressing the will of the young people regarding unification. ② The act of dually assisting in the activities of anti-government organizations, etc. should reach the extent that they expressed their intent to actively respond to and respond to the activities of anti-government organizations, etc. to the extent that it can be evaluated as praise, encouraging, and promoting the activities of anti-government organizations, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2001Do4328, Sept. 23, 2003; 2003Do758, Apr. 17, 2008).

C) Determination of the immediate deliberation

In light of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the court below's above determination is justified.

The judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there is no error of law by misunderstanding the facts as pointed out by the prosecutor. Therefore, the prosecutor's assertion is without merit.

2) The participation of Defendant A, B, C, D, E, F, G, and H in the sixth ordinary meeting

A) Summary of the facts charged

M on February 27, 2011, with the attendance of 40 members, including Defendant A, B, C, D, E, E, F, G, and H, the sixth general meeting was held to be held on February 27, 2011 in the office of the FP Games of the Jung-gu Seoul Central Government, and the order was followed such as the approval of the business report and evaluation proposal in 2010, the report of the settlement of accounts and approval thereof in 2010, the report of the M Medium long-term Development Special Committee in 2010, the election and approval of the sixth-term executive branch, the adoption of the draft business plan in 201, the adoption of the MM decision in 2011, the report on the business report and evaluation plan in 2010, the proposal of the M-to long-term Development Special Committee in 201, and the major contents of the decision in 2011 are as follows:

In 2010, us was trying to create a fake rank voting and household voting against the overall voting of the Su-gu forces, and us had prepared for the F Q Q and his family members and their descendants in the workplace, and went on the distance by putting the clicket for the 10th anniversary of the 15 Joint Declaration of 15th and the 10th anniversary of the 10th anniversary of the 6.15 Joint Declaration, us found some of the people who were involved in the signing of the 10th anniversary of the 10th anniversary of the 10th anniversary of the fact-finding's 10th anniversary of the 10th anniversary of the 15th Declaration, us only demanded to return the North Korean unification regime's policies to the peace and peace of the anti-Korean unification regime. It was evaluated that the CDA government was an anti-Japanese-friendly policy-making regime, anti-Korean unification regime, anti-government peace regime, and anti-government regime.

I would like to make the Korean Peninsula as high-speed, and inter-Korean relations have been deteriorated. It would be able to make a self-help evaluation more than 1 in the part of the self-unified Campaign that does not see the 1st century. It should be tally assessed that M& 20 years ago have been passive and sensitive to the 6.15 Joint Declaration, and that M& 15 years' activities in the 6.15th Joint Declaration have to be kept in mind. 206, by clarifying the purpose and character of M&, organization system, and so on, the 1st 206-year anniversary of the 1st 206 M&M campaign. However, the 1st 206-year anniversary of the 1st 206 M&M campaign, the 1st 20-year anniversary of the 1st 1st 206-year anniversary of the 200-year unification campaign, and the 1st 20-year anniversary of the 2nd 15th Ma.

To form public opinion on the anti-war, peace, and unification campaign, and to spread anti- CDs and anti-N sentimentss to the public, it strengthens the public peace centered on the first-time war strike and anti-war peace.The core strike is three months: the war training and anti-war peace meeting throughout the country; 6.15-8.15 times the unification of anti-military forces; 6.15 and 10.4 times the peaceful unification movement by major meters; 201 the implementation of the Declaration.(MMMMMMMMMMM, 201, 201, 201, 6.15 times the first-time peace and anti-state peace and anti-state peace and 201, 6.15 times the first-time peace and anti-state peace and 2010, 6.15 times the second-year co-government of the Korean Peninsula and 2010, 2010, 2011, 2011.

This is the content of North Korea's propaganda and inciting the withdrawal of pro-Japanese remuneration regime and independent democratic government, war opposing peace protection, anti-war peace movement, 6.15 Joint Declaration and 10.4 Declaration, which are based on the premise of the number of iron in the United States Armed Forces.

As a result, Defendant A, C, D, E, F, G, and H conspired with other participants in the event that it threatens to endanger the nation’s existence and security or democratic fundamental order, they praise, encourage, promote, or promote the activities of inciting South and North Korea, which are anti-government organizations, such as the formation of the unification remuneration force of North Korea and the establishment of an independent democratic government.

B) The judgment of the court below

According to the data collection of the 6th ordinary general meeting, the court below found that the above general meeting was a part of the evaluation of the activities of M in 2010 and the direction of M in 2011, and there was no reason to recognize that the above general meeting was an exercise in concert with North Korea's assertion and caution. The above data collection criticizes the CD regime and includes part of the contents of the person who was the front of the political strike. However, in light of the overall context or the method of expression, in light of the whole context or method, it appears that these contents were entered in the perspective of asserting anti-de, peace, and unification, which is a policy that criticizes the unification policy of the CD government and supports M, and does not contain any contents threatening the existence, safety, and free democratic basic order of the Republic of Korea. Thus, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to regard the M6th general meeting as an exercise of the 2010 general meeting, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this. Thus, this part of the above act was not guilty under the latter part

C) Determination of the immediate deliberation

In light of the following circumstances, which can be acknowledged by evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, i.e., ① the general meeting is the highest decision-making body that determines a serious issue with M's activities and material affairs, and thus, it appears that the evaluation, business plan, decision, etc., which determines one year's activities and material matters regardless of the time of debate at the general meeting or the quantity of materials held at the general meeting seems to be the core contents. ② According to the above general meeting's data collection, M is the "W"'s project report and evaluation in the 2010 project report and evaluation bill, and its anti-unit peace policy, which shows through the 20th anniversary of the 2010 project report and evaluation bill, has been developed as the Korean Peninsula, and the inter-Korean relations have been developed as the aggravation of the Korean Peninsula, and it can be seen that there were no errors in the misapprehension of the legal principles as to the above activities and anti-government organizations' formation of a new anti-government organization's anti-government organization's anti-government organization's publicity and its assertion to be unilaterallyed with the two-state.

3) Defendant A’s participation in the second representative meeting on October 11, 2008, the second representative meeting on March 21, 2009 and the first representative meeting on March 21, 2009

A) Summary of the facts charged

Defendant A participated in the '6th conference of representative held in Seoul on October 11, 2008', and participated in the 'the 7th conference of representative held in the FT in Gyeonggi-gun on March 21, 2009', and 'the 7th conference of representative held in the FT located in the FT in Gyeonggi-gun on March 21, 2009, thereby endangering the nation's existence and security or free democratic fundamental order, in collusion with the participants of the above conference, who were aware of the fact that it would endanger the nation's existence and security or democratic fundamental order.

B) Determination

In light of the following circumstances, which can be recognized by evidence duly adopted and investigated at the court below and the court below, i.e., ① the fact that Defendant A was present at each of the above events, ② the R is recognized as a dual organization; ③ the representative of the organization and the executive chairperson, and the chairperson of each of the tasks as the highest deliberative body of R; and in the fourth event, the group of representatives is composed of the representative of the organization and the chairperson of the task; as in this part of the facts charged, the group of North Korea's pro-Japanese unification force, such as the formation of the 6.15 Joint Declaration; the implementation of the National Security Act; and the abolition of the National Security Act; and ⑤ the adoption of the approval of the project plan and the special resolution of the representatives' meeting with the contents of the activities to instigate pro-Japanese propaganda activities; ⑤ the defendant A was the representative of the above events, who is a member of the organization at the time, and participated in the above events. Thus, the court below erred in the misapprehension of legal principles as to this part of the facts charged.

(4) Defendant C’s holding of the 7 R7th Session on July 18, 2009 and participating in the 8th Session on March 27, 2010.

A) Summary of the facts charged

Defendant C as a representative of M 4 and a member of the Council of R representatives, around July 18, 2009, held the second session of R7 at the M Office located in Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government BF, and around March 27, 2010, as a member of the Council of M 5 representative and the first session of RR representatives held in Seoul, the participation in the first session of the 8th session held in Seoul and thereby endangering the nation’s existence and security or democratic fundamental order. Recognizing the fact that, in collusion with the aforementioned participants, it would endanger the nation’s existence and security or democratic fundamental order.

B) Determination

The following circumstances, which can be acknowledged by evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below and the court below, i.e., (1) the defendant C participated in each of the above events as a representative member of the "representative meeting"; (2) the second representative meeting held in M; and (3) the defendant C approved the business plan with the content of praiseing, encouraging, promoting, or aiding and abetting North Korea's external activities in each of the above events; (4) the letter of resolution or a special resolution was adopted; and (5) the nature of the representative meeting and the main body of the attendance at the meeting, upon knowing the fact that the defendant C may endanger the existence and security of the State or democratic fundamental order, in collusion with the participants of the above meeting, and thus, it can be recognized that the defendant C actively responded to and responded to this part of the facts charged, as stated in this part of the facts charged, and thus, the court below found the defendant guilty. Thus, the prosecutor's allegation in this part of the charges is justified.

1) Distribution of Defendant A’s ’Joint Resolution of the 5th S representative Meeting’ on April 30, 2008

A) Summary of the facts charged

Defendant A posted the document of the title “FV” on April 30, 2008 and “Myh World website.”

M The third secretariat C attended the meeting from April 26, 2008 to April 28, 2008 and reported the result of the meeting. The main contents of the resolution stated in the above document are as follows.

On the other hand, ○○ and the representatives of young students’ groups in South and North Korea have maintained up to the end of the 6.15 Joint Declaration, and 10.4 Declarations are bound to keep up to the end of the 6.15 Joint Declaration, and the 10.4 Declarations are decided as follows: ○○, the Cheongscing will to do so in the unification movement to open the new era of peace and peace prosperity. First, we will thoroughly observe the nationalism in the unification movement of young students with the life line of our nation: 6. We will strengthen the unity of our nation by promoting the unification and return the 6,15th Escopic unification era.Second, we will try to eliminate the national unification movement of the anti-Korean unification force in front of the national war movement of the anti-Korean unification force, to prevent the collective unification between the two and the Korean society and to prevent the collective unification of the nation, and to prevent the collective unification of the nation, and to prevent the collective unification between the two and the Korean society.

The contents are as follows: (a) North Korea's establishment of the New Year's Joint Privateism and the Anti-Korean War, etc.; and (b) North Korea's establishment of the 6.15 Joint Declaration and 10.4 Declaration under 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 Republic of Korea's Republic of Korea's North Korea's Republic of Korea's Republic

As a result, the Defendant possessed pro-enemy materials for the purpose of praiseing, encouraging, promoting, or aiding and abetting the activities of North Korea, which are anti-government organizations, with the knowledge that it may endanger the existence and security of the State or democratic fundamental order.

B) The judgment of the court below

The court below held that the contents of this article are a fundamental content that expresses the intent to the unification and peace change era by practicing the spirit of 6.15 Joint Declaration and 10.4 Declaration, and it does not appear to be an active and aggressive expression that threatens the existence and security of the State, or democratic fundamental order, and further, it is insufficient to recognize that the remaining evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone constitutes an active and aggressive expression that threatens the existence and security of the State and democratic fundamental order, and that this part of the charges constitute a case where there is no evidence to prove a crime.

C) Determination of the immediate deliberation

In light of the records, a thorough examination of the evidence of this case reveals that the court below's measures that judged that this part of the facts charged constituted a case where there is no proof of crime based on the above evidence judgment are justified, and in addition, the court below selected the participants of the 5th S Representative Meeting prepared by the above documents in the Ministry of Unification (in particular, the court rejected the North Korea from the members of AA recognized as a dual organization) in advance, and ② The above written resolution does not use the expression of citing the North's argument as it is (defluence, abolition of the National Security Act, the number of U.S. military forces, and the opposition to war, etc.), it does not seem that there is an error of misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles as pointed out by the prosecutor in the judgment of the court below.

2) The production and distribution of Defendant A’s 3 M/M evaluation statement on January 29, 2009

A) Summary of the facts charged

Defendant A, as the third representative of M on March 28, 2009, organized and operated a general assembly preparation committee for the preparation of the fourth general meeting, which was scheduled to be held on March 28, 2009. On January 29, 2009, Defendant A posted the documents of “FY” and the files of “208 evaluation / [1] evaluation.” The main contents of the said files are as follows.

○ In 2008, the 2008 Ma was a combination of basic activities with the implementation of the 6.15 Joint Declaration / 10.4 Declaration, the 10.4 Declaration in the United States Armed Forces, and the conclusion of the peace agreement with the United States Armed Forces. The 6.15, and 8.15 of the 200 Ma Ma-15 refer to the force of all the people, and the 6.15, and the direction of the Ma-○ Ma-○ Ma-○ Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-Ma-U.

This is to publicize and instigate peace agreements on the Korean Peninsula that North Korea constantly argued as part of the Act on the Round of the South Korean Revolution through a new and Japanese common theory and anti-civil dialogue, and to enter into a peace agreement on the Korean Peninsula, to enter into a public peace and pulverization of the Korean Peninsula and to break down the National Security Act, to oppose the Korean-U.S. military training, and to fight against the Republic of Korea-

As a result, Defendant A had a pro-enemy pro-enemy for the purpose of praise, encouraging, promoting, or aiding and abetting the activities of North Korea, which are anti-government organizations, with the knowledge that it may endanger the existence and security of the State or democratic fundamental order

B) The judgment of the court below

The court below held that although the above article contains some arguments made by North Korea and foreign organizations, such as the USFK number and the removal of the National Security Act, this part of this article is merely that M’s initial plan in 2008. The whole is an objective evaluation of M’s activities in 2008, and it is not included in the North Korea’s assertion or the North Korea’s assertion, and furthermore, it is not sufficient to recognize that the remainder of the materials submitted by the prosecutor alone constitutes active and aggressive expressions that threaten the nation’s existence and security and democratic fundamental order, and that this part of the facts charged constitute a case where there is no evidence to prove a crime.

C) Determination of the immediate deliberation

In light of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the court below's above determination is justified.

The judgment is just and acceptable, and it is difficult to find that there is an error of law by misunderstanding facts or by misunderstanding legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment, and this part of the prosecutor'

3) Possession of pro-enemy contents using Defendant A’s e-mail

A) Summary of the facts charged

On February 23, 2009, Defendant A received the attached files from R, a dual organization, using the e-mail account (FT) in the name of Defendant A, for the purpose of promoting the youth movement, and for the purpose of promoting and promoting the e-mail and 'aaaa'. On November 16, 201, Defendant A kept the attached files up until the time of seizure and search. The contents of the above e-mail and attached files were kept until November 16, 201 based on the e-mail and attached files, which North Korea constantly asserted as part of the e-mail route through the e-mail theory, anti-Japaneseism, anti-Korean regime, and independent democratic government establishment, broad unification cable establishment, 6.15 Joint Declaration, and 10.4 Declaration, etc. In particular, the e-mail and attached files are as follows: “the main body of the e-mail and the subject of the e-mail of the Korean culture movement” based on the 'the main body of the e-social movement.

In addition, Defendant A received eight pro-enemy contents from WF, etc. from February 9, 2009 to March 29, 201, as shown in the attached list of crimes (9) of the lower judgment, at the time of search and seizure of the above e-mail account in the name of the Defendant on November 16, 201. Accordingly, Defendant A, knowing that the act of North Korea, which is an anti-government organization, may endanger the nation’s existence and security or democratic fundamental order, possessed 9 items of pro-enemy contents using the above e-mail account for the purpose of misunderstanding, encouraging, promoting, or aiding and abetting the activities of North Korea, which is an anti-government organization.

B) The judgment of the court below

원심은, ① 이 부분 공소사실 중 R로부터 온 [청년위] 청년운동 강화 단결 토론자료'라는 제목의 이메일 및 'aaa'라는 제목의 첨부파일을 포함하여 원심판결 별지 범죄일람표 (9) 순번 1, 3 내지 8의 경우, 검사가 제출한 증거만으로는 피고인 A이 자신의 이메일 계정으로 수신된 메일을 열어 그 이메일에 첨부된 이 사건 문건 파일을 확인하였다는 점을 인정하기에 부족하고, 달리 이를 인정할 증거가 없으므로, 피고인 A이 이 사건 수신문건들의 내용을 알면서 이적행위를 할 목적으로 이 사건 문건을 소지하였다는 점이 합리적인 의심의 여지없이 증명되었다고 보기에 부족하고, ② 원심판결 별지 범죄일람표 (9) 순번 2 기재 이메일 'ㅈㅈㅈㅈ'과 그 메일에 첨부된 '19차 M운영 위.hwp' 의 경우 피고인 A이 그 문건의 소지 사실을 인정하고 있으나, 그 내용은 주로 한반도 평화 통일 시대를 위하여 청년운동의 역량을 강화하자는 것으로, 북한을 무비 판적으로 찬양하거나 국가의 존립·안전, 자유민주적 기본질서를 위협하는 적극적이고 공격적인 내용이 존재하지 아니하여 이를 이적표현물로 보기 어려우므로, 이 부분 공소사실은 모두 범죄의 증명이 없는 경우에 해당한다고 판단하였다.

C) Determination of the immediate deliberation

(1) 우선 원심판결 별지 범죄일람표 (9) 순번 2 기재 이메일 'ㅈㅈㅈㅈ'과 그 메일에 첨부된 '19차 M운영위.hwp'에 관하여 본다. 원심이 적법하게 채택하여 조사한 증거들에 비추어 보면, 원심의 위와 같은 판단은 정당한 것으로 수긍할 수 있고, 거기에 사실을 오인하거나 법리를 오해하여 판결에 영향을 미친 위법이 있다고 보기는 어려우므로, 검사의 이 부분 주장은 이유 없다.

(2) Next, in light of the fact that there is no evidence to prove that the defendant was a visit by the attachment date of the e-mail in the attached list of the lower judgment, the attached file of the attached list of the e-mail [Listening], “aaaa”, and “aaaaa” in the attached list of the lower judgment, which is in the form of the attached file, and that there is no evidence to confirm that the defendant was a visit by the attachment date inside the e-mail, there is insufficient room for reasonable deliberation to acknowledge that the defendant confirmed the file by opening the file. Thus, the Prosecutor’s assertion on this part is without merit.

(3) Examining the e-mail in the annexed list of crimes Nos. 1, 3, 4, 5, and 7 of the judgment below, the following circumstances are acknowledged by evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below and the court below. ① Defendant A received the e-mail in the annexed list of crimes (e-mail) and each mail in the annexed list of the court below's judgment; ② Defendant A opened all the above e-mail and expressed the above e-mail as read mail; ③ in the case of mail with the contents indicated in the main sentence of e-mail, the e-mail is opened by the defendant; ③ in the case of e-mail, the e-mail is recognizable only by opening the e-mail, and the contents of the e-mail are deleted from the e-mail list No. 9 of the above e-mail list with the exception of the search and seizure of the defendant's e-mail account; and (1) the above e-mail is deleted from the e-mail list No. 97 of the above e-mail.

(4) However, the e-mail Nos. 1 in the annexed list of the judgment of the court below is hard to see that WF proposed practical contact to the Youth Students Subcommittee around February 5, 2009, and accordingly, the answer letter of agreement from North Korea to practical contact arrives by facsimile. As such, the part of the participation in practical contact arrives by facsimile, which is the answer of North Korea, to the agreement of WF’s proposal. The youth subcommittee of the Z North Korean Committee provides the e-mail with the intention of unification force inside and outside of Korea, and it is difficult to further advance and promote a campaign for democracy, democracy, and unification, and it is difficult to see that the e-mail Nos. 1 in the annexed list of the judgment of the court below and all members of the e-mail of the Republic of Korea, and the whole e-mail No. 1 in the e-mail list of the government's e-mail safe and e-mail movement between South and North Korea is no more than 3 months following the e-mail movement of the Republic of Korea.

(5) Therefore, even though Defendant A had possession of e-mail Nos. 3, 4, 5, and 7 in the annexed list of crimes (9) of the judgment below, which is pro-enemy contents, for the reason that there was no proof as to the facts charged, the court below acquitted Defendant A on the ground that there was an error of misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles as to the facts charged. Thus, the Prosecutor’s argument as to the e-mail Nos. 3, 4, 5, and 7 in

4) Defendant A’s residence in the third session of the General Assembly Preparation Committee of 2010

A) Summary of the facts charged

On April 30, 2013, Defendant A had the third meeting of the General Assembly Preparation Committee of 2010 at his/her own residence in Jung-gu Seoul Central Government ET Operation 303, and the main contents are as follows.

<논의 및 토론 안건>2010년은 2012년 총선과 대선이 맞물리는 정치적 격변기를 준비하는 데서 본격적인 대결이시작되며 그 첫 번째 대결이 바로 지방선거이다.○ 진보개혁진영이 CD-N당과의 싸움에서 승리하느냐 패배하느냐에 따라서 향후 CD가 남북관계에서 반북대결정책을 고수할 것인가. 반민중정책으로 민중들을 탄압할 것인가, 민주주의를 끝없는 몰락의 구렁텅이로 몰아넣을 것인가가 결정된다.

In line with 6.15 of this year, the value of the 6.15 Joint Declaration should be re-consumed, and 6.15 should be light at 10 square meters in seeking a popular peaceful unification movement for the realization of 6.15 Joint Declaration (the M business Plan of 2010). The 2012 year is a political motive facing the total line, and the total transition of inter-Korean relations and entry into a new phase of inter-Korean relations is expected.Therefore, the 2010s should be made within 20 years, focusing on the time table for strengthening autonomous unification capacity of the Korean Peninsula, the 2010s should be centered on the formation of a new peaceful unification movement of the Korean Peninsula by 100s, and the 20th anniversary of the 20th anniversary of the 15th anniversary of the 2012 Agreement, it should be difficult to see that the 201th anniversary of the 20th anniversary of the 20th anniversary of the 2012 Agreement.

Under the premise that the Republic of Korea is a citizens of the Stateism, North Korea continues to claim as part of the route of the Do-U.S. Revolution through the Do-U.S. Joint Do-U.S. Joint Do-U.S. Joint Do-U.S. and anti-government Do-U.S. Do-U.S. Joint Do-U.S. Do-U.S. Joint Do-U.S. Do-U.S. Do-U.S. Do-U.S. 6.15 Joint Do-U.S. Do-U.S. Do-U.A

B) The judgment of the court below

The lower court determined that this part of the facts charged constitutes a case where there is no proof of a crime, on the grounds that the summary of the above writing is not included in active and aggressive contents threatening the nation’s existence and security and democratic fundamental order, and thus, it is difficult to view it as pro-enemy contents, on the following grounds: (a) M is required to prepare a plan for the realization of the public movement of the Republic of Korea from 2010 to take advantage of the large resolution of the CDA Government and NN in 2012; and (b) the above document is merely an incidental part, although there is an mentioning the issues such as the number of iron bars in the United States Armed Forces in Korea; and (c) the overall purport of the document is to discuss the unification issue for the sake of the right to gather inventive force; and (d)

C) Determination of the immediate deliberation

In light of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the court below's above determination is justified.

The judgment is just and acceptable, and it is difficult to find that there is an error of law by misunderstanding facts or by misunderstanding legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment, and this part of the prosecutor'

5) Possession of pro-enemy contents using the e-mail of Defendant B [the e-mail of Defendants 1 through 4, 6 through 11, 14, 16, and 17 attached to the judgment of the court below]

A) Summary of the facts charged

On May 27, 2007, Defendant B received e-mail in the e-mail account (EU) used by Defendant B from R, a dual organization, from the e-mail account (EU) and kept it in the said e-mail account until the time of search and seizure on April 29, 2013.

The contents of the above mail and attached files advocate the legitimacy of North Korea’s nuclear development, while evaluating that North Korea exercises the leading authority over North and South Korea’s nuclear development through nuclear development, and that North Korea’s Republic of Korea’s pursuit of North Korea’s North Korea’s e-mail account should be actively developed the anti-U.S. war, the war against North Korea’s North Korea in North Korea, and the war against North Korea’s e-mail in South Korea. Defendant B, as described in the attached list of crimes (2) 1 through 4, 6 through 11, 14, 16, 17, from that time to October 27, 2007, was seized and seized until the time of seizure and seizure of pro-enemy materials from that time to April 29, 2013.

As a result, Defendant B possessed 14 cases of pro-enemy contents using the above e-mail account for the purpose of praise, encouraging, promoting, or aiding and abetting the activities of North Korea, which is an anti-government organization, with knowledge that it may endanger the existence and security of the State or democratic fundamental order.

B) The judgment of the court below

According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the court below determined that the e-mail, such as the contents Nos. 1 through 3, 6, and 7 of the annexed crime list (2) of the court below, was received through the Defendant B’s e-mail account, but it is not sufficient to recognize that Defendant B opened the e-mail received to his e-mail account and confirmed the document file of this case attached to the e-mail, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it; 2) in the case of the e-mail listed in the annexed crime list Nos. 4, 8 through 11, 14, 16, and 17 of the court below’s judgment, there is no evidence to recognize the fact that the e-mail, such as the contents, was received through the Defendant B’s e-mail account, and therefore, this part of the charge does not constitute

C) Determination of the immediate deliberation

(1) First of all, there is no evidence to prove that the e-mail No. 4 of the judgment of the court below was kept in Defendant B’s e-mail account, and this part of the prosecutor’s assertion is without merit.

(2) Next, according to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the Health Team, the court below and the court below as to the e-mail listed in Nos. 1, 3, 7, 8, 9 of the attached list of crimes (2) in the judgment below, it is insufficient to recognize without reasonable doubt that the defendant opened and confirmed the file in light of the fact that each of the above e-mail is recognized as being "readable mail", but there is no evidence to confirm it by the date of the invasion inside the e-mail. Thus, the prosecutor's assertion on this part is without merit.

(3) Meanwhile, according to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below and the court below as to the e-mail listed in Nos. 2, 6, 10, 14, 16, and 17 of the attached list of crimes (2) in the judgment below, the following facts are indicated as follows; ① 2, 6,10 e-mail listed in the attached list of crimes (2) in the court below's judgment; ② 14, 16, and 17 listed in the attached list of crimes (2) in the main text of the e-mail; ③ e-mail sent by the defendant to G or BN; ③ in light of the above circumstances, the defendant was aware of the contents of the main sentence of the above e-mail; ④ the contents of each e-mail are the same as indicated in the facts charged; ⑤ Defendant B was elected as an educational source of the E-U.S. and processed materials with the higher organization, and thus, Defendant B was found not guilty.

6) On February 27, 2011, Defendant C, D, and E’s 6th regular meeting data collection; Defendant E’s 201 using the medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium

A) Summary of the facts charged

Defendant C. D and E discussed the adoption of agenda items and the production of data collection as a member of the Preparatory Committee at the 6th regular meeting, and on February 27, 2011, Defendant C, D and E held the 6th regular meeting and distributed data collection produced and prepared in advance to the participants in the meeting at the 13th regular meeting of the former FO building in Seoul, including Defendant A, B, C, D, E, E, F, G, and H, at the 13th regular meeting of the FO building in Seoul.

The main contents of the above data collection are as follows: (a) North Korea along with North Korea’s new and anti-civilism, etc.; and (b) propaganda and inciting North Korea’s military power praises, nuclear development, establishment of independent democratic government on the premise of the number of iron in the United States Armed Forces; and (c) the attack of anti-united remuneration force. In addition, Defendant E was in possession of the same content as the above 4.B-2(a) in the place of residence of Defendant E located in Mapo-gu Seoul, Mapo-gu, and 102 as the above 4.B-2(a) in a digital file format as the digital file format, and Defendant G had the same content as the above 4.2(a) in the place of residence of Defendant G in Bupyeong-gu, Incheon, as the foregoing 4.2(b).

As a result, Defendant C, D, and E were aware of the fact that it may endanger the existence and security of the State or democratic fundamental order, and were produced and distributed pro-enemy contents for the purpose of praise, rubber, propaganda, or assistance with the activities of North Korea, which are anti-government organizations. Defendant E, and G possessed pro-enemy contents for the aforementioned purpose.

B) The judgment of the court below

As seen earlier 4-B-2(b), the lower court determined that the materials collection of the 6th regular meeting of the instant M constituted a whole of anti-state, peace, and unification, and that it is difficult to view that the materials collection of the 6th regular meeting of the instant M consists of contents related to anti-state, peace, and unification, unlike North Korea’s assertion and caution, or that it constitutes a threat to the existence and security of the Republic of Korea and democratic fundamental order, and that the materials collection of the 6th regular meeting of the instant case constitutes pro-enemy materials

C) Determination of the immediate deliberation

As examined in the above 4-B-2(c), the core contents of the 6th regular meeting of M are as follows: (a) acting in concert with and inciting North Korea; and (b) acting in concert with and inciting it, which may endanger the existence and security of the State or democratic fundamental order; (c) therefore, the suitability of this is recognized; and (d) the collection of materials in which the contents of discussions and resolutions are entered at the above regular meeting of shareholders should also be recognized; and (e) the above general meeting of shareholders can sufficiently be held to discuss the contents of the above collection and to fully recognize the fact that the defendants, members of M who resolved to resolve, made, distributed, and possessed them for the dual purpose; and (e) the court below found the Defendants not guilty of this part of the facts charged, and there is an error of law by mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, even if

7) Possession of a singing country of self-government unification using Defendant G’s residence, and of a singing country of self-government unification

A) Summary of the facts charged

On April 30, 2013 and April 30, 2013, Defendant G entered the subjects, such as pro-enemy price, BK, etc. in the Defendant G’s residence in Bupyeong-gu, Incheon. In particular, Defendant G carried pro-enemy contents, with a singing house called “Sari and Cheongsri,” written in the singing book of “Sari Unification” in which the Republic of Korea and the Republic of Korea praises AW.

B) The judgment of the court below

According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, the court below determined that the above singing is not a active and aggressive expression threatening the nation's existence and security and free democratic fundamental order, and that the above singing is not an active and aggressive expression threatening to the nation's existence and security and the free democratic basic order, and that the facts charged in this part of the facts charged are not proven unless there is any evidence to prove otherwise. The court below determined that the above singing is not an active and aggressive expression threatening the nation's existence and security and free democratic basic order.

C) Determination of the immediate deliberation

According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the above singing book contains 36 stories in North Korea. Among them, the singing (such as a sing in excess of the singular line, a singular line, and a revolution) is included in the contents of propaganda and inciting the socialist revolution, but the circumstances that can be acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, i.e., (i) the above singing has weak expression to the extent that it is difficult to understand the contents of propaganda and inciting North Korea's assertion, and (ii) the above singing was published from September 25, 193 and sold in the Northern-gu Incheon Metropolitan City (the name before the change of administrative district as at the present). In light of this, the above singing was sold in the singing book without any justifiable reason to acknowledge that the above Defendants acquired the above part of the facts in question with no evidence to be used for the purpose of reading or selling them for any other purpose, and (iii) it appears that there was no other evidence to have been no reason to acknowledge that the above Defendants acquired or acquired the above part of the above facts.

8) Defendant 1’s materials on 6th course using the medium medium medium medium: They possess the direction and task of the unification of the Korean Peninsula with the materials on war and peace in the Korean Peninsula and 7th course.

A) Summary of the facts charged

On April 30, 2013, the Defendant stored documents consisting of “6 books of file name”, “hwp”, and “Korean War and Peace” in the Nowon-gu, Suwon-gu, Suwon-si, GD 301, which were kept in the Defendant’s residence, on the Nowon-gu, Suwon-gu, Suwon-si, and the main contents are as follows.

Japan, the War Crisis of the Korean Peninsula>

Although it seems that 00 U.S. armed forces have established a new order beyond the world's confrontation, it was called ‘North Korea'. The issue of manufacturing weapons of mass destruction, such as nuclear power or historical wave, has occurred since the 1950s. From the viewpoint of North Korea, nuclear development has been inevitable choice in the situation where the 1950s military forces and the 1950s military forces have completed nuclear warfare.On the other hand, the meaning of the peace system and the implementation plan of the 00s military peace should be improved first to ensure the peace of the Korean Peninsula. It is necessary to support the establishment of a new peace system of North Korea, such as experience in inter-Korean relations, and ultimately to solve the problem of establishing a new peace system of North Korea.If it is inevitable to establish a new peace system of North Korea in the process of the 1950s, it is necessary to establish a new peace system of North Korea in North Korea.

It is different from the fact that the U.S. Armed Forces might cause economic anxiety, such as escaping from overseas capital, in Japan.In short, the Korean military union has changed the iron and Han-U.S. military relationship from the military union to the general friendly cooperation relationship, and when permanent peace in the Korean Peninsula has been settled, stable investment has a longer active range in the long term.

In addition, the defendant stored the documents consisting of the "seven books of the file name", "hwp", and "Korean Peninsulas" as the direction and task of peaceful unification" in the above Nowon-gu computer, and the main contents thereof are as follows.

In the 1945 century, the time required by the U.S. government to decide the division order of the Korean Peninsula was 30 minutes.In the 1945 century, it was thought that the 38th line, regardless of the will of the Korean people, would be streke of the 1st century.In the 1960 Revolution, the 1960 Revolution, which had been enforced by the 1st century, was the beginning of the 1st century and the 7th anniversary of the 196th anniversary of the 1960 Revolution, the 1st century was the 196th anniversary of the 199 Revolution, the 196th anniversary of the 199 Revolution, the 1st century was the 196th anniversary of the 196th anniversary of the 195 Revolution, the 196th anniversary of the 196th anniversary of the 196th anniversary of the 196th anniversary of the 196th anniversary of the 196th century.

The unification of the United States Armed Forces in Korea is the most reasonable way to resolve the problem of unification.The unification of the United States Armed Forces in Korea recognizes the other party's system and system to equally participate in the two Koreas, and carries out each local self-government system with the same authority and duty.The task of unification realizing the two Koreas has not been settled properly. It is the reality of our society that pro-Japanese still remains pro-Japanese in the roots of politics, economy, social culture, and all fields, and their descendants enjoy friendity and honor. It is the representative of the National Security Act to overcome the problem of national security law that 00-Korean relations have developed as reconciliation cooperation relations, and the national security law has no choice but to be abolished in the era of the 2000-Korean Peninsula.

On the other hand, from the viewpoint of the nationalism, it is necessary to solve the unification problem by the power of our nation.In this principle, the Korea-U.S. military union should be re- coordinated, and the U.S. military union should also solve the problem.

It is evaluated as a legitimate self-defensive measure corresponding to the United States' nuclear threats, while North Korea's nuclear experiment is regarded as a legitimate self-defensive measure, such as the conclusion of the peace agreement between the United States of America, the United States Armed Forces of America, the dissolution of the Korea-U.S. Union and the abolition of the National Security Act.

Accordingly, the defendant, knowing that it may endanger the existence and security of the nation or democratic fundamental order, has two pro-enemy contents with a total of two intent to praise, encourage, promote, or aid the activities of North Korea, which is an anti-government organization.

B) The judgment of the court below

The court below held that ① the above 6th curriculum is described in the way to realize the peace of the Korean Peninsula, and its contents are relatively objective, and that North Korea has developed its nuclear power in the above article is an inevitable choice due to military tension in the situation where the U.S. and the U.S. military conflict, and such contents are mentioned in the tension decentralization and the realization of military axis between South and North Korea, and waiver of North Korea's nuclear weapons. These contents are distance from the position to defend North Korea's nuclear possession without any requirement as North Korea. In addition, in this article, it is possible to conclude a peaceful agreement between the South and North Korea in the situation where the U.S. armed forces are stationed in the U.S. armed forces, and finally, the U.S. Armed Forces can be removed if permanent peace is established in the Korean Peninsula, and it is not based on the view of the existing organizations, such as the coordination of the South and North Korea military union to strengthen, but it appears that the above contents of the National Security Act include more restrictive measures than the above contents of the National Security Act.

C) Determination of the immediate deliberation

In light of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the court below's above determination is justified.

The judgment is just and acceptable, and it is difficult to see that there is an error of law by misunderstanding facts or by misunderstanding legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

5. Determination on Defendant’s assertion of unreasonable sentencing

In light of the fact that M is deemed not to act at present, M is deemed not to have intended or induced the establishment and security of the State or the fundamental order of free democracy through violent means, such as revolutions or armed fessing machines, etc., M is one of the core fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution, and the freedom of thought and expression is one of the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution to maintain human dignity and value, and is an essential element of a democratic system, and the Defendants’ activities are deemed not to have any particular response except for the members of the existing dual organizations, such as U.S., and the fact that M’s activities are expected to have no particular impact on our society.

However, the freedom of thought and expression is not unlimited, but unlimited, if it threatens the existence and security of the State, and democratic fundamental order, it is inevitable to restrict the restriction, and the discussion and study on unification should be actively recommended. However, beyond this, it is not permissible to cause social inequality by praiseing North Korea in secret against North Korea or following the argument as it is. M has the same contents as that of North Korea and existing interest groups, as seen earlier, and the method of activities was not significantly different. North Korea, which is an anti-government organization, still has a realistic threat force to overcome our free democracy system while taking advantage of the hostile unification route, is a realistic threat force to overcome our free democracy system; the Defendant was active as a member of M from the preparatory group before forming M, and continuously acted as a M member, such as M’s executive officer.

In addition, considering the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, motive and background of the crime, means and consequence of the crime, the circumstances after the crime are committed, it is not recognized that the punishment of the court below is too unreasonable. Therefore, this part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

6. Conclusion

가. 원심판결의 무죄부분 중 피고인 A의 2008. 10. 11. R 6기 2차 대표자회의', 2009. 3. 21. R '7기 1차 대표자회의' 각 참가, 2011. 2. 27. 'M 제6차 정기총회' 참가, 이메일을 이용하여 원심판결 별지 범죄일람표(9) 중 순번 3, 4, 5, 7 기재 이적표현물 소지로 인한 각 국가보안법위반(찬양·고무등)의 점, 피고인 B의 2011. 2. 27. 'M 제6차 정기총회' 참가, 이메일 계정을 이용한 원심판결 별지 범죄일람표(2) 순번 2, 6, 10, 14, 16, 17 기재 이적표현물 소지로 인한 각 국가보안법위반(찬양·고무등)의 점, 피고인 C의 2009. 7. 18. R '7기 2차 대표자회의' 개최, 2010. 3. 27. R '8기 1차 대표자회의' 참가, 2011. 2. 27. 'M 제6차 정기총회' 개최, 2011. 2. 27. 'M 제6차 정기총회 자료집' 제작·반포로 인한 각 국가보안법위반(찬양·고무등)의 점, 피고인 D의 2011. 2. 27. 'M 제6차 정기총회' 개최, 2011. 2. 27. 'M 제6차 정기총회 자료집' 제작 · 반포로 인한 국가보안법위반(찬양·고무등)의 점, 피고인 E의 2011. 2. 27. 'M 제6차 정기총회' 개최, 2011. 2. 27. 'M 제6차 정기총회 자료집' 제작·반포, 노트북 저장매체를 이용한 2011_M 총회 자료집' 소지로 인한 국가보안법위반(찬양·고무등)의 점, 피고인 F의 2011. 2. 27. 'M 제6차 정기총회' 개최로 인한 국가보안법위반(찬양 · 고무등)의 점, 피고인 G의 2011. 2. 27. 'M 제6차 정기총회' 개최, 거주지를 이용한 '6차 총회 자료집' 소지로 인한 국가보안법위반(찬양·고무등)의 점, 피고인 H의 2011. 2. 27. 'M 제6차 정기총회' 개최로 인한 국가보안법위반(찬양·고무등)의 점에 대한 검사의 항소가 이유 있어 이 부분 원심판결은 더 이상 유지될 수 없게 되었다고 할 것인바, 당심에서 유죄로 인정된 위 부분과 원심에서 피고인 A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H에 대하여 유죄로 인정된 각 죄는 형법 제37조 전단의 경합범 관계에 있어 형법 제38조 제1항에 따라 하나의 형을 선고하여야 할 것이므로, 피고인 A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H의 양형부당 주장에 관한 판단을 생략한 채 형사소송법 제364조 제6항에 의하여 원심판결 중 피고인 A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H의 유죄부분과 위 각 무죄부분을 각 파기하고(원심판결 중 피고인 F에 대한 부분은 유죄부분과 무죄부분이 모두 파기되므로, 전부 파기한다), 다시 변론을 거쳐 다음과 같이 판결한다.

B. Defendant I’s appeal and prosecutor’s participation in the 6.15 Joint Declaration of June 9, 2008 and the 10.4 Declaration of Youth Students for the 10.4 Declaration, distribution of the 5th S Representative’s Joint Resolution on April 30, 2008, e-mail and 6.15 [Attachment 4]’s e-mail and 6.1’s e-mail for the 6.6th anniversary of the 6.5th Declaration of the National Security Act (the 6.5th Declaration of the 6.0th Declaration of the 196th Declaration of the 196th Declaration of the Republic of Korea), Defendant’s 10th Declaration of the 6.5th Declaration of the 196th Declaration of the 5th Declaration of the 5th Declaration of the 196th Declaration of the 196th Declaration of the 196th Declaration of the National Security Act (the 196th Declaration of the 10th Declaration of the 206th Declaration of the 106th Declaration).

[Judgment of the court below which used again for the guilty portion of Defendant A, B, C, D, E, F, G, and H and the reversed acquittal portion] among the judgment of the court below, criminal facts and summary of evidence

The criminal facts recognized by this court against Defendant A, B, C, D, E, F, G, and H are as follows: “Defendant A’s second representative meeting on October 11, 2008”; “Defendant A’s first representative meeting on March 21, 2009”; “Defendant A’s possession of pro-enemy contents using the e-mail of Defendant A”; “Defendant C’s second representative meeting on July 18, 2009”; “Defendant C’s 7th meeting on March 27, 2010”; “Defendant C’s 10th representative meeting on March 27, 2010; “Defendant C’s 8th representative meeting on March 1, 2010; “Defendant C, C, D, E, F, G, H’s 6th meeting on October 11, 2008; “Defendant C’s 10th meeting on the e-mail list using the e-mail storage media; Defendant C; Defendant 160/6th meeting on the same content.

The defendant A's participation in the second meeting of the representative on October 11, 2008 in the R6th meeting of the representative on October 11, 2008.

On October 11, 2008, the Defendant participated in the second session of the R6th session held by the nine incumbent members, including the Defendant, in Seoul. The term "R" was introduced by presenting the "plan for the second session of the R6th session" at the above meeting as an agenda and continuously adopting the "special resolution of the headquarters for the R". The main contents are as follows.

The 6th anniversary of the 19th century regime reveals the complete denial of 6.15 and 10.4 declarations, and the anti-united nature of the 6.15 and 10.4 declarations, and inter-Korean relations are expected to be faced by the CDA regime, and inter-Korean relations are expected to be faced with the extreme state by the CDA regime in the future.The 6th century regime should be established to strengthen the wide range of public relationship with the leading mechanism for the withdrawal of the regime. Moreover, youth students should facilitate a wide range of anti-cyber wire and actively serve in the organization of new organizations for democracy and the broad public anti-international pressure countermeasures. Moreover, a wide range of public and the people should actively serve in the organization, etc. of a new organization for democracy and the wide range of anti-international pressure countermeasures.

To develop, the legitimate space should be opened, and the organization should be maintained and strengthened as a aggressive action campaign. ○ democracy, sovereignty realization, and 6.15 and 10.4, all of which should be spread, even more. It should be able to shotly progress as a strong public suppression and pulverization of the CD regime, and the organization of youth 1,000,000,000,0000,0000,000,0000,0000,0000,0000,0000,0000,0000,0000,0000,000,000,0000,0000,0000,0000,000,0000,0000,000,0000,0000,0000,000,0000,0000,000,000.

The young students will be able to fully develop the struggle of the anti-public pressure crushing and the regime withdrawal. Our young students will bring about the 2-lelelight lelelight fight in the second half of the year.The implementation of the 6.15 and 10.4 Declaration and the implementation of the 6.15 and 10.4 Declaration and the anti-war peace spacific students will bring into place in close contact with the CD regime spacife.In October 11, 2008, the Korean young students will come into force.

The purpose of this is to promote and instigate the friendly unification force, realization of sovereignty, 6.15 Joint Declaration, and 10.4 Declaration, the abolition of the National Security Act, the Korea-U.S. FTA storage place, and the anti-state peace struggle in collusion with the participants of the above conference, which would endanger the nation's existence and security or democratic fundamental order. As such, the Defendant, while in collusion with the participants of the above conference, was aware that it would endanger the nation's existence and security or democratic fundamental order, embling, encouraging, promoting, promoting, or aiding the activities to instigate to instigate South-North Korea, which are anti-government organizations.

[The indictment contains "after the defendant was elected as a clerk at the above conference," stating that "after the above conference, the "the strike plan for the second half of the year was presented as an agenda and adopted as a unanimous rule for the participants." However, the defendant was elected as a clerk, and there is no evidence to prove that the above agenda was adopted as a unanimous rule, and therefore, the above facts of the crime should be corrected to the extent that it does not harm the identity of the facts charged."

The intervention of the first representative meeting of the R7 R on March 21, 2009 by the defendant A

On March 21, 2009, the Defendant participated in the FT meeting of the first representative of the R7 R, which was held in the presence of 14 registered members such as the Defendant, etc. in the FT located in the Female-gun.

The above meeting was conducted in the order of the R6 project report and evaluation, the settlement of accounts, the election of the executive branch, the adoption of the 7th project plan plan, and the adoption of the resolution letter that "the development of the 7th project plan in the preceding place of the R's self-unified interest in unification". The main contents of the above project plan and the resolution are as follows:

<사업계획안>○ 현재 미국은 북한이 핵보유국이 지위에서 인공위성 발사체의 과학기술력을 보유한강국이라는 사실을 인정할 수밖에 없는 국면에서 쩔쩔매고 있다. 더욱 충격적이며,놀라운 사실은 북한이 2012년 경제강국, 강성대국의 목표를 달성하게 될 것이라는것이다. 정기 군사강국의 반열에 확고히 올라선 북한에게 경제강국 건설의 실현은불가능한 일이 아니다.미국은 북한에 압박을 가하려고 하지만 북한은 오히려 우주 개발에 착수하고 거침없이 실행하고 있다. 마치 과거 미국과 구소련의 우주개발 경쟁전을 보는 것처럼북한은 군사강국처럼 자신의 권리를 행사하고 있다.○ 반전평화가 그 어느 때보다도 높게 요구되고 있다. 오늘의 반전평화운동은 반 CD투쟁과 밀접히 결합되고 있다. 살인정권에 이어 전쟁 정권 물러가라는 국민의 외침은 더욱 높아지게 될 것이다.한반도 전쟁을 근원적으로 제거해야 할 때에 민족공멸까지도 염두한 작전계획이주한미군 주둔과 무력증강에 기초하여 세워지고 있는지 이러한 심각성을 하루빨리알려내고, 주한미군을 철수시키기 위한 범국민적 조직을 마련해고 투쟁의 공간을확대해야 한다.

한반도 평화협정실현운동 등 각계에서 전개되는 미군기지 철폐투쟁, 미군철수 운동과 연대해야 한다.○ 일대 전환의 실천적 성과란 우리 민족의 입장에서 6.15공동선언과 10.4선언의 이행이다. 구체적으로는 남북관계에서 6.15공동선언과 10.4선언을 전면 부정하면서 지금의 한반도 전쟁책동을 조장시키고 있는 CD 정권의 퇴진일 것이다. 그리고 북미관계에서는 우리민족끼리 문제에 간섭하며 CD 정권을 앞세워 끊임없이 한반도 평화를 위협하고 있는 미국과의 정전협정을 평화협정으로 전환하는 것을 의미한다.○ 언제 어느 때보다 심각하게 전운이 감돌고 있는 한반도 전쟁국면에서 CD정권 퇴진투쟁을 전 국민적으로 본격화시키고 반미- 반전평화 투쟁을 적극 결합시켜야 한다.KR 가 앞장에서 자주통일 승리의 돌격로를 개척하자.> 제목의 결의문○ 청년들이여 가슴벅찬 자주, 민주통일 승리의 새 시대가 열리고 있음을 느낄 수 있는가.○ 이땅 민중들의 강렬한 자주, 민주, 통일 실현의 열망과 의지가 확고한 이상 이미승리는 목적에 다가 왔다. 뿐만아니라 CD 정권과 미국의 전쟁책동을 앞세우며 제아무리 민족대결책동을 조장할지라도 분단 반시기만에 마련된 우리민족끼리의6.15와 10.4남북공동선언은 굳센 민족중시, 민족단합의 위력을 발산되고 있다.○ 우리 청년학생들은 남북공동선언 이행의 기치를 전면에 들고 2010년, 2011년,2012년의 폭발적 대중투쟁으로 CD 정권을 퇴진시키고 자주적 민주정권 수립의튼한 토대를 마련해야 한다.○ 우리민족끼리의 기치를 전면에 내걸고 6.15공동선언 9돌부터 10.4선언 2돌까지 전

Through the period of the common movement of the nation, we will continue to develop the struggle and practice for self-unified unification and peace prosperity continuously during the period of the common movement of the nation.R young people, students will have a high political power to be able to move ahead of the independence, democracy, and unification of the fatherland as soon as possible, and live in the public with a lot of practice and struggles, and show the Cheongsck's Cheongk's Cheongk's Cheongk's Cheongk's Cheongk's Cheongk's Cheongk's Cheongk's Po's Po's Po's Po's Pos.

The purpose of this is to propagate and instigate North Korea’s pro-Japanese unification force, which is an anti-government organization, in collusion with other participants, in order to protect the nation’s existence and security or democratic fundamental order, in concert with the North Korea’s pro-Japanese unification force, the implementation of the 6.15 Joint Declaration, the 6.15 Joint Declaration, the 10.4 Declaration, and the 10.4 Declaration, which are held by the Korean people. Accordingly, the Defendant, while being aware that it would endanger the nation’s existence and security or democratic fundamental order, was committed in concert with the North Korea’s pro-Japanese unification force, which is an anti-government organization.

On August 18, 2009, the Defendant received e-mail from “R,” an immigration organization, using the e-mail account (FZ) under the Defendant’s name, [name] and received e-mail from “Apumpump Gapump Dopump Doump Doump Doump Doump Doump Doump Doump Training,” and was kept until the time of search and seizure on November 1

The main contents of the above e-mail are as follows.

This is very high risk when a drill was conducted based on an operational plan 5027 that focuses on the invasion of North Korea. 0.15 Joint Declaration of June and 10.209, disregarding the President of the United States and the United Nations Declaration of 10.4 Declaration, and using the DaY regime that illegally conducted the reform of the North Korean War, it is difficult to view it as a simple exercise of the 5th anniversary of the implementation of the 5th North Korean War. The 195 North Korean War 2000 U.S. War 2000. The 5th North Korean War 2005 North Korean War 1000 U.S. Anti-Korean War 2000. The 5th North Korean War 2005 North Korean War 2005 North Korean War 2000 U.S. Anti-Korean War 3000 U.S. Anti-Korean War 5000 U.S. Anti-Korean War 2006

This is to publicize and instigate North Korea as part of the routes of the United States Revolution, the 6.15 Joint Declaration and 10.4 Declaration, the 6.15 Declaration and the 10.4 Declaration, the dissolution of the Korea-U.S. history and the opposition to the Korea-U.S. Military Training.

In addition, as indicated in the list of crimes (9) Nos. 4, 5, and 7 attached to the judgment of the court below, the Defendant had three pro-enemy contents received from R from August 24, 2009 to March 22, 2010, which were kept until the time of search and seizure of the above e-mail account under the name of the Defendant on November 16, 201. Accordingly, upon knowing that it would endanger the nation’s existence and security or democratic fundamental order, the Defendant possessed 4 items of pro-enemy contents using the above e-mail account with the intent of harming, encouraging, promoting, promoting, or manufacturing the activities of North Korea, which are anti-government organizations.

(Defendant C's second representative meeting on July 18, 2009)

On July 18, 2009, the Defendant held the second meeting of R7th representative in M Office located in Jongno-gu Seoul, Jongno-gu, Seoul.

In the presence of nine executive members including the defendant and R Full-time CZ, and the executive chairperson of the Z, the meeting dealt with the issues such as the "decision of contribution to the full-time representative of the UF", "2/4 quarterly activities report and the report on the settlement of accounts, "organization of the countermeasures headquarters against RR anti-readers", "AMU organization and support", and adopted the "MU organization and support" as a whole.

The main contents of "R 6.15 to 10.4, approved at the meeting of the representative, are as follows.

We need to clearly understand why the U.S. is approaching the military confrontation or why the reason for it is. The U.S. is the state of the State of the State of the State of the State of the State of the State of the State of the State of the State of the State of the State of the State of the State of the State of the United States. The U.S. taking the new cooling system and moving the electric wires to North Korea is

We must see that the war of the United States and CDs is strongly demanded.In order to see the change of the autonomous unification between the United States and CDs, it is necessary for young students to strengthen their dynamic organizational capabilities in the era of the 5th century, the 1st century and the 5th century, the 5th anniversary of the Korean Peninsula, the 1st century and the 5th anniversary of the war planned by the United States and CDs, the 5th anniversary of the 8th anniversary of the 5th anniversary of the 5th anniversary of the 5th anniversary of the 5th anniversary of the Republic of Korea.The 5th anniversary of the 5th anniversary of the 5th anniversary of the 5th anniversary of the 5th anniversary of the 5th anniversary of the 1st century, the 5th anniversary of the 5th anniversary of the 5th anniversary of the 5th anniversary of the Korean Peninsula, the 5th anniversary of the 5th anniversary of the Republic of Korea National Security Act and the 5th anniversary of the public regime.

Pro-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa

The main contents of the “Written Decision of the Representative Council” adopted at the meeting above are as follows: (a) the key contents of the “Written Decision of the Representative Council” are far from the front of the CD withdrawal.

The CD regime is a private regime that sells country's own sovereignty and dignity to the U.S. and Japan due to crypting and ebbbing diplomacy. The CD regime is the regime that uses external force so that it can cover the dynamics by cutting off a war union to the eG and DY. In addition, the CD is the national unification force that denies the South and North Joint Declaration of June 15, 10.4, denies the nation's refusal of free absorption and free unification conspiracy, and reveals the ebbbblance during the South and North Korean War. The CD’s books that want to drink North Korea with the anti-uniting policy of non-nuclear opening 3000, namely, the armed conflict between the South and North Korea and the North Korea is merely a war that causes the 3rd SP and the North Korea to die. Only the Korean people who depart from the Republic of Korea will live in the entire North Korean crisis, and the North Korean people will live in the North Korean crisis.

As such, the defendant held the second representative meeting of the R 7th period along with CZ, DZ, etc. and adopted the 'R' business plan with the contents of the argument such as the 6.15 and the implementation of the 6.10.4 Declaration that North Korea promoted and instigates through the new common view of the year, etc., the defendant approved the 'R' business plan with the contents of the argument, such as the anti-unit unification force dissipation of the anti-united force, the 'National Security Act pulverization of the country', the 'self-state, democracy, and the 'representative' resolution'. Accordingly, the defendant, in collusion with CZ, DZ, was aware that it may endanger the nation's existence and security or democratic fundamental order.

Defendant C’s participation in the 1st Session of the 8th Session on March 27, 2010.

The Defendant participated in the 8rd representative meeting held in Seoul around March 27, 2010 as a member of the 5th representative interest and R representative meeting.

The meeting of the above representatives deals with the issues, such as the 7th R R project report and evaluation, the amendment of the rules, the election of officers in the 8th R, and the 8th R2010 plan, while 12 persons, such as the defendant and the R Standing CZ, the executive chairperson, etc., are present, and the 7th R project report and evaluation approved by the meeting of the representatives are as follows:

○○ Republic of Korea opened the door of the public campaign by means of a total non-Confidence vote. Then, we continued to maximize the political propaganda activities to judge RR’s CDs. ○○ Student Committee complained of the full-scale strike of anti-domination in the anti-domination of anti-domination immediately after the outbreak. The student committee continued to hold a national net team to stop the paths to the detonating fuses of the CDs.In the process of the implementation of cultural activities on major issues, such as the ○ satellite launch, nuclear test, the Korean Peninsula strategy analysis, and EY President SY, the student committee came to have been a member of the Student Committee, and came to further deepening with DE and CE. From 207 to 2007, the student committee came into operation of the public research and development of the CD in order to ensure that it would have been consistent with the results of the public research and development of the CD.

The main contents of the "resolution of the Meeting of Representatives", which was adopted at the meeting of the representatives, are as follows: (a) the era of democratic change is the first person due to the realization of peace and the reading trial; and (b) the resolution of the meeting is as follows:

In the present phase where the request for the realization of peace by the nation is realizing, North America and anti-national forces, and the CD regime still use a number of different types to drink and sell our nation, regardless of how the demand is made. The history of ○○ calls strongly to remove those who interfere with the truth of justice until the end and to express their distinct and distinct strings. The answer must be met, and we must realize exchanges and visits. However, because of the CD regime that prevents all paths of the South and North Korea and has been a CD regime that has been frighted, the passage of the club still remains effective only for us. It is the diameter of our regime to judge all the regime. Furthermore, our country's withdrawal must be regarded as our country's right to the CD and its own interest should be realized, and our country's right should be free and free from the distance.

As such, the defendant approved R 2010's 'the plan' and adopted the resolution of the representative meeting with the contents of the 'the strengthening of solidarity', the 'the conclusion of the North America peace agreement', the 'the number of the irons in the USF in the US', which was promoted and instigated by North Korea through the new common history theory, etc. by participating in the first representative meeting in the R 8th session, and the 'the resolution of the representative meeting' was adopted.

Accordingly, the Defendant, in collusion with CZ, DZ, etc., praiseed, encouraged, advertised, or abetted the activities of anti-government organizations or their members, or those who received their order, while being aware of the fact that it may endanger the existence and security of the State or democratic fundamental order. On February 27, 2011, the MF participating in the 6th ordinary general meeting of the Defendants A, B, C, D, E, F, G, and H was held at the office of the FO 13th century of Seoul Central Government on February 27, 2011 at the office of the Defendant, B, D, E, F, H, G, and H, and 40 members including the Defendant, the 6th general meeting meeting was held and approved for the business report and evaluation proposal in 2010, the report on the settlement of accounts and approval for the 2010 Long-Term Development Special Committee, the M-Term Development Plan was 6, the election and approval of the 2011 project plan, and the following major contents were 10 years and 20 years M.

We tried to create a 20-year business report and evaluation plan, 00-year presidential voting, and household voting against the total voting by several forces, and we were working for 2010-year working for 2010-year work, and have prepared F Q and one day propaganda with their families. They were aware of the fact that they would have been able to receive quality, and that we were able to find some of the people who participated in the signing of the 10-year Common Declaration of 6th 15th 10-year Joint Declaration, and requested to return the 6-year Common Policy of the 10-year Uniform Republic to the peaceful direction of the 60-year General Assembly. The 6th 5th 10-year General Assembly Declaration was the 10-year General Campaign, the 10-year General Campaign, the 6th Mau-Mam2's Multi-Korean Relations and the 6th Mau-Japan General Policy, and the 6th Mau-Japan General Policy should still be evaluated as the 10-year.

D. However, the 1st century, which was in progress at the time, is one of the 5th century, and is an exemplary case, is established for the purpose of 6.15 realization. The 6.15th realization can be carried out in various ways, such as inter alia, FR, daily campaigns, etc.The 2010-2010-201-201-201-201-201-201-201-201-201-201-201-201-201-201-201-201-201-201-201-201-201-201-201-201-201-201-201-201-201-201-201-201-201-201-200-30-201-201-201-20-200

As can be seen in the instant case of the ○cheon-gu and the Domar Island, the CDA regime has fluened the two Koreas into a blank of 6.15 Joint Declaration and went into force as a threat of war. ○○ 2011 is the beginning of 2012, which will serve as a serious political motive for the Korean society. In this year, we need to set up anti-war peace in order to protect the peace of the Korean Peninsula, and all the struggles must be tightly boomed into a anti- CD attack. ○○, therefore, M is able to take a aggressive anti-war peace movement in various ways, which is planned to take account of the characteristics of M only under the framework of the 'Korean War No. 2019, Mar. 1, 201, and actively implement the 6.15 Joint Declaration on February 27, 2011.

This is the content of North Korea's propaganda and inciting the withdrawal of pro-Japanese remuneration regime and independent democratic government, war opposing peace protection, anti-war peace movement, 6.15 Joint Declaration and 10.4 Declaration, which are based on the premise of the number of iron in the United States Armed Forces.

As a result, Defendant A, C, D, E, F, G, and H conspired with other participants in the event that it threatens to endanger the nation’s existence and security or democratic fundamental order, they praise, encourage, promote, or promote the activities of inciting South and North Korea, which are anti-government organizations, such as the formation of the unification remuneration force of North Korea and the establishment of an independent democratic government.

On February 27, 2011, the term "M 6th regular meeting data collection" was produced and distributed on February 27, 2011, "M 6th regular meeting data collection", "2011 using Defendant E's medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium medium," and "sixth regular meeting data collection by using Defendant G's residence," Defendant C.D and E discussed adoption of the agenda as a member of the Preparatory Committee for the 6th regular meeting, production of data collection, etc., and then the above Defendant A, B, C, D, E, E, F, G, and H's 6th regular meeting (hereinafter referred to as "the 6th regular meeting part of the 6th regular meeting") was prepared and distributed to Defendant A, B, C, D, F, G, and 40 members of the Jung-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government FO building's 13th regular meeting.

The main contents of the above data collection are as shown in the part of the 6th general meeting of shareholders, in concert with North Korea's military power praises, nuclear development safeguard, establishment of independent democratic government, and propaganda of anti-unified repair power under the premise of the number of U.S. irons in Korea. In addition, the defendant Eul stored and possessed "2011-M general meeting data collection" as stated in the part of the 6th general meeting of shareholders in the 6th general meeting of shareholders in digital file format at the residence of the defendant Eul located in the Seoul Mapo-gu Seoul Mapo-gu and 102, and the defendant G had "6th general meeting data collection" book with the same contents as the part of the 6th general meeting of shareholders in the 6th general meeting of shareholders.

As a result, Defendant C, D, and E were aware of the fact that it may endanger the existence and security of the State or democratic fundamental order, and were produced and distributed pro-enemy contents for the purpose of praiseing, encouraging, promoting, or aiding and abetting the activities of North Korea, which are anti-government organizations. Defendant E, and G possessed pro-enemy contents for the aforementioned purpose.

On May 27, 2007, the Defendant received e-mail (EU) from X-EM, a foreign organization, to the e-mail account (EU) used by the Defendant, and kept it in the said e-mail account until the time of search and seizure on April 29, 2013.

In the 'St.hwp' file attached to the above e-mail, the following contents are stated:

In particular, the 2005 North Korea's 2.10 nuclear possession declaration and the 1006 North Korea's 2006 North Korea's 10.9 nuclear test have changed fundamentally, and the dynamicism of power between North and North Korea has changed within several years, and the 2007 government has reached a favorable position to achieve the unification of the Republic of Korea and the number of the U.S. military forces within several years. The 2007 Doctrine policy on the failure of the U.S. government has to be able to achieve the emerculation and the emerculation of democracy. (.) The 6th Doctrine policy on the failure of the 2005 North Korea's 207 Doctrine to the bankruptcy state. In particular, the 1st 2007 Doctrine of the North Korean government's emerculation should be able to achieve the emerculation of the unification of the Republic of Korea.

This is to defend the legitimacy of North Korea's nuclear development, while North Korea exercises the initiative of North and South Korea's relationship through nuclear development, and thereby to promote a high-level federal system unification through the low level federal system asserted by North Korea while evaluating that North Korea's power will be able to exercise the initiative of North and South Korea's relationship through nuclear development.

In addition, as indicated in Nos. 2, 5, 6, 10, 12, and 18 of the e-mail list (2) of the lower judgment, the Defendant kept 12 pro-enemy contents sent and received from the time to October 27, 2007 from the time of the search and seizure of the said e-mail account until April 29, 2013.

As a result, the Defendant possessed 12 cases of pro-enemy contents using the above e-mail account for the purpose of praise, encouraging, promoting, or aiding the activities of North Korea, which is an anti-government organization, with the knowledge that it may endanger the existence and security of the State or democratic fundamental order.

Application of Statutes

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

A. Defendant A: Article 7(1) of the National Security Act, Article 30 of the Criminal Act, Article 7(5) and Article 7(1) of the National Security Act (the production, possession, and distribution of each pro-enemy organization, and Article 30 of the Criminal Act in the case of production and distribution of materials collection at the third regular general meeting of shareholders in M)

B. Defendant B: Article 7(3) and (1) of the National Security Act [the membership of a foreign organization: Provided, That the upper limit of punishment shall be as prescribed by the main sentence of Article 42 of the former Criminal Act (amended by Act No. 10259, Apr. 15, 2010; hereinafter the same shall apply]; Article 7(1) of the National Security Act; Article 30 of the Criminal Act (the praise, rubber, promotion, or possession of each anti-government organization); Article 7(5) and (1) of the National Security Act (the possession of each anti-government organization)

C. Defendant C: Article 7(3) and (1) of the National Security Act (this refers to joining a pro-enemy organization; however, the upper limit of punishment is stipulated by the main sentence of Article 42 of the former Criminal Act); Article 7(1) of the National Security Act; Article 30 of the Criminal Act (the praise, encouragement, promotion, or distribution of each anti-government organization); Article 7(5) and (1) of the National Security Act (the production, possession, distribution, and production of each anti-government organization; the 'M Nos. 3, 4, 5, 6th annual meeting data' and production and distribution of materials for the pro-enemy organization)

D. Defendant D: Article 7(3) and (1) of the National Security Act (the fact of joining the foreign organization, however, the upper limit of punishment shall be as stipulated by the main sentence of Article 42 of the former Criminal Act), Article 7(1) of the National Security Act, Article 30 of the Criminal Act (the fact of misunderstanding, encouraging, promoting, or promoting anti-government organizations), Article 7(5) and (1) of the National Security Act (the fact of producing, possessing, distributing pro-enemy contents, producing and distributing materials for the 5th and the 6th regular general meeting of shareholders), and Article 30 of the Criminal Act is added to the case of producing and distributing materials for pro

E. Defendant E: Article 7(3) and (1) of the National Security Act (this refers to joining a pro-enemy organization; however, the upper limit of punishment is stipulated by the main sentence of Article 42 of the former Criminal Act); Article 7(1) of the National Security Act; Article 30 of the Criminal Act (the praise, rubber, promotion, or distribution of anti-government organizations); Article 7(5) and (1) of the National Security Act (the production, distribution of possession, distribution of possession, production, and distribution of materials for pro-enemy contents; Article 30 of the Criminal Act is added in the case of producing and distributing materials for pro-enemy contents; Article 5

(f) Defendant F: Article 7(3) and (1) of the National Security Act (the fact of joining the foreign organization, however, the upper limit of punishment shall be as prescribed by the main sentence of Article 42 of the former Criminal Act), Article 7(1) of the National Security Act, Article 30 of the Criminal Act (the praise, rubber, promotion, or possession of foreign expressions) and Article 7(5) and (1) of the National Security Act (the possession of foreign expressions);

G. Defendant G: Article 7(1) of the National Security Act, Article 30 of the Criminal Act (the praise, rubber, propaganda, or possession of each anti-government organization) and Article 7(5) and (1) of the National Security Act (the possession of each anti-government organization)

H. Defendant H: Article 7(1) of the National Security Act, Article 30 of the Criminal Act (the praise, rubber, promotion, or possession of each anti-government organization) and Article 7(5) and (1) of the National Security Act (the possession of each pro-enemy organization)

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

A. Defendant A: The former part of Article 37, Articles 38(1)2, and 50 of the Criminal Act [of the concurrent crimes for the punishment stipulated in the National Security Act due to the holding of the fourth general meeting of shareholders with the largest punishment for the crimes and the crimes committed by Defendant B, C, D, E, and F], Defendants B, C, E, and Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act are concurrent crimes committed against the National Security Act with the largest punishment for the crimes committed by Defendant G, H: the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 [of the concurrent crimes committed against the National Security Act due to the holding of the fifth general meeting of shareholders with the largest punishment for the crimes and the crimes committed by Defendant A]

1. Discretionary mitigation;

Defendant F: Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act

1. Concurrent imposition of suspension of qualifications;

Defendant A, B, C, D, E, G, and H: Each Article 14 of the National Security Act

1. Suspension of the execution of imprisonment;

Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Code

1. Confiscation;

Defendant A, B, C, E, G, and H: Reasons for sentencing under Article 48(1)1 of the Criminal Act

1. Common sentencing conditions

In light of the fact that M is deemed not to act at present, M appears to have attempted or failed to promote or instigate the existence and security of the State or democratic fundamental order by means of violent means, such as revolutions or armed drums, etc. The freedom of thought and expression is one of the core fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution, and is one of the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution to maintain human dignity and value, and is an essential element of a democratic system, and the Defendants are deemed to not have any particular response except for the members of existing organizations such as U.S., and the fact that M’s activities are deemed not to have any particular impact on our society, etc. are favorable to the Defendants.

However, the freedom of thought and expression is not unlimited, but unlimited, if it threatens the existence and security of the State, and democratic fundamental order, it is inevitable to restrict the restriction, and the discussion and study on unification should be actively recommended. However, beyond this, it is not permissible to cause social inequality by praiseing North Korea in secret against North Korea or responding to its assertion as it is, and thus, it is not permissible to cause social peace. M has the same contents as the argument of North Korea and existing interest groups as seen earlier, and the method of activities was also not significantly different. North Korea, which is an anti-government organization, still is a realistic threat force that intends to reverse our free democracy system while taking advantage of the routes of harmony and unification, etc. is a condition unfavorable to the Defendants.

2. Individual sentencing conditions

A. Defendant A

The Defendant has already been punished for the same kind of crime; the Defendant joined M from the beginning of the formation of M; the 2nd and the 3nd representatives of M; the Defendant actively participated in the events of other pro-enemy organizations; and the Plaintiff appears to play a key role in M, such as inducing M members to participate in the events above, or distributing pro-enemy materials of other pro-enemy organizations to members; and the conditions of common sentencing as seen earlier; and other circumstances, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive and circumstance of the crime, means and consequence of the crime; and the circumstances after the crime, etc., shall be determined as ordered by the Disposition, comprehensively taking into account various circumstances.

B. Defendant B

The defendant joined M on October 20, 2006 and was in the position to take the lead in the activities of M, such as joining M and taking charge of the management of M, producing data collection from a superior organization, etc. The above common sentencing conditions and other circumstances, including the defendants' age, character and conduct, environment, motive and background of the crime, means and consequence of the crime, etc., shall be determined as per the order, comprehensively taking into account the following circumstances.

C. Defendant C

The defendant has already been punished for a crime of the same kind, is in charge of the fourth and fifth representatives of M, and appears to play a key role in M, such as participation in the dual events of superior organizations, as a representative, etc. The above common sentencing conditions and other circumstances, including the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, motive and background of the crime, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, shall be determined as per the order, comprehensively taking into account.

D. Defendant D

The defendant is responsible for the sixth representative of M and appears to have led the activities of the organization, and the conditions of common sentencing as seen earlier, and other circumstances, such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, motive and background of the crime, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, shall be determined as ordered, comprehensively taking into account.

E. Defendant E

The defendant is responsible for the seventh representative of M and appears to have led the activities of the organization, and the conditions of common sentencing as seen earlier, and other circumstances, such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, motive and background of the crime, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, shall be determined as ordered in comprehensive consideration.

F. Defendant F

The defendant does not have a period of activity in M and appears to have no pro-enemy pro-enemy, and the common sentencing conditions as seen earlier, and other circumstances, such as the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, motive, circumstances, means and consequence of the crime, etc., shall be determined as stated in the Disposition, comprehensively taking into account the following circumstances.

G. Defendant G

In full view of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant was active as a member of M from the preparatory group prior to the formation of M; (b) the Defendant continued to serve as a member of M; (c) the Defendant was holding a number of recommendations; and (d) the common sentencing conditions as seen earlier; and (e) the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive and circumstances of the crime; (b) the motive and consequence of the crime; and (c) the circumstances after

H. Defendant H

The Defendant was active as a member of M from the preparatory group before formation of M, and continued to serve as a member of M while serving as the executive officers of M, and taking into comprehensive account the following factors, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, circumstances, means and consequence of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., the punishment as ordered shall be determined.

Summary Judge of the presiding judge;

Judges Cho Yong-chul

Judges Park fixed-time