The Edual Rate

Defendant and Prosecutor

A fixed-type non-party 1

Law Firm Shin-soo, Attorneys Kim Jong-type et al.

Seoul Central District Court Decision 2003Gohap1205 Delivered on March 30, 2004

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

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

One hundred and sixty-one days of detention before the judgment of the court below is rendered shall be included in the above sentence.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for five years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Of the facts charged in the instant case, Paragraph 1 (the point of performing the duties of the executive officer or other guidance of an anti-government organization), Paragraph 2 (f) (the point of escape to the territory of an anti-government organization as of July 13, 1994), and Paragraph 4 (Contacting with members of an anti-government organization more than three times) are acquitted.

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

I. Summary of the grounds for appeal

1. Defendant (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed by his defense counsel) (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate brief filed by his defense counsel within a lawful period);

A. As to the judgment of the court below on the unconstitutionality and invalidity of the National Security Act

(1) To regard North Korea as an anti-government organization is contrary to the ideology of peaceful unification of the fatherland pursued by the Constitution and recognizes the norm of compelling the people to renounce peaceful unification efforts, and thus, is in violation of the Constitution.

(2) The National Security Act violates the principle of no punishment without the law and the principle of equality under the Constitution, deviates from the constitutional limit of restriction on fundamental rights, and it is against the liberal democratic fundamental order because it is the means to see different groups of ideas as "the enemy".

B. As to the part of the judgment below's performance in the duties of executive officers and other guidanceal duties

(1) Article 3(1)2 of the National Security Act provides that ① the provision on physical freedom under Article 12(1) of the Constitution and the principle of legality, ② the principle of equality under Article 11 of the Constitution, ③ the principle of excessive prohibition under Article 37(2) of the Constitution, ④ the law of unconstitutionality and invalidation in violation of each provision on peaceful unification policies under Article 4 of the Constitution.

(2) The facts charged are deemed null and void in violation of the statutory provisions, since the time when the Defendant was appointed as executive officers of the North Korean Shipbuilding Labor Party is unclear, and the method of appointment is not specifically specified.

(3) Although the Defendant was not appointed as a candidate for the political party of the North Korean Joseon Labor Party, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged on the grounds of this, by fully recognizing the protocol of interrogation of the Defendant as to the Defendant in the process of preparing the North Korean Joseon Labor Party, the part concerning the full text of Nonindicted 2 and 3 among Nonindicted 1’s statements, the two computer diskettes (No. 1) prepared by Nonindicted 4, and each of the printed printed documents.

(4) Since various literary activities of the defendant are based on academic research purpose, they cannot be viewed as guidanceal duties for North Korea, which is an anti-government organization.

(5) Other criminal facts (the part of the defendant's writing on the so-called "the Act on the Access to Home Information" published in Korea around December 198, 198, and the part of the defendant's operation of the Korea Science Research Institute from 1992 to 1994, and the part of the defendant's participation in the Kim Il-sung funeral event on July 19, 194) cannot be deemed as falling under "the guidance duty" as stipulated in Article 3 (1) 2 of the National Security Act.

C. As to the special escape of the judgment below

(1) As stipulated in the special escape crime under Article 6(2) of the National Security Act, the Defendant does not escape from “to receive an order from, or to consult or consult with, an anti-government organization or a member thereof,” and this part of the facts charged is all acquitted, and even if it is deemed to constitute a crime of simple escape under Article 6(1) of the National Security Act, since the statute of limitations has already expired, all of the judgment dismissing prosecution should be dismissed.

(2) Of the facts charged, each of the special escape charges after August 18, 1993, which the defendant acquired German citizenship, constitutes the so-called foreigner's overseas crime. Therefore, since there is no jurisdiction in the Korean court, the dismissal of public prosecution must be ruled.

(3) If the concept of “age” and “escape” under Article 6(2) of the National Security Act are expanded to be actively applied to the instant case, such interpretation is in violation of the principle of clarity, which is the essential substance of the principle of no punishment without law, and the said provision is unconstitutional and invalid.

D. As to the assembly and communications among the judgment below

(1) All of the facts charged are that the defendant acquired German citizenship after August 18, 1993 and constitutes the so-called foreigner's overseas crime. Therefore, since there is no jurisdiction in the Korean court, the dismissal of prosecution must be ruled.

(2) Even if not, the Defendant’s act of sending to Kim Jong-il a letter of confluence, Kim Il-il, and Kim Jong-il, merely constitutes a case where the existence and security of the State or democratic fundamental order may not be deemed to be a case where it threatens to endanger the national existence and security or democratic basic order.

E. As to the attempted fraud in the judgment below

(1) The key issues of this part of the civil lawsuit brought by the Defendant against Nonindicted 1 are whether the Defendant is ○○○○, a candidate for the political bureau of the North Korean Joseon Labor Party. However, the Defendant cannot be deemed to have deceiving the court since he did not have been appointed as a candidate for the political bureau of the North Korean Joseon Labor Party.

(2) In addition, the Defendant filed the above civil lawsuit to restore honor from the beginning, but did not intend to acquire money, and thus did not intend to acquire the criminal intent or unlawful acquisition.

F. As to the sentencing

The sentence of the court below is too heavy.

2. A prosecutor;

A. As to the non-guilty portion of the judgment below

(1) As to the point of special escape more than 13 times in total relating to the Unification Science Council from February 28, 1995 to March 22, 2003, and meetings with members of anti-government organizations more than 10 times in total from September 2, 1997 to March 22, 2003

Although the above uniform academic conference was held at the request of South Korean scholars, such as Nonindicted 5, etc., the defendant arranged the above uniform academic conference and responded to it by the so-called "act of publicity for the unification of the upper floor" for the purpose of mutual assistance to South and North Korea, under such circumstances, the defendant's act of consulting the issue of holding the above uniform academic conference and entering North Korea to participate in such conference constitutes a case where there is a clear danger that the existence and security of the State or democratic fundamental order might be harmed.

(2) On July 7, 1997, as to special escape relating to Kim Il-sik and meeting with members of anti-government organization

First, in the case of this case, the order to attend Kim Il-sik was directed in North Korea, which is within the territory of the Republic of Korea, and the defendant's intent to carry out his order reaches North Korea. Thus, although some of the crimes were long, the crimes were committed in North Korea, which is within the territory of the Republic of Korea, and thus, should not be regarded as "domestic crimes" or "foreign crimes".

Second, even if not, the crime of escape under Article 6 of the National Security Act is considered to be a special provision of the general provision of the Criminal Act concerning a foreigner's overseas crime, so even if a foreigner commits the crime of escape outside the territory of the Republic of Korea, the provision of the National Security Act can be applied under the proviso of Article 8 of the Criminal Act.

Third, the Defendant acquired German nationality in order to avoid the application of the National Security Act by concerns over being punished as the act of acquiring foreign nationality in accordance with the so-called “○○○○” and applying the National Security Act, in such a case as the Defendant’s acquisition of German nationality is likely to be subject to punishment upon disclosure of his/her activities, such as reporting the Kim Il-sung on May 1991 to labor newspapers, while engaging in anti-state activities under the name of “○○○○”.

Fourth, although the defendant was a person who acquired German nationality, he had already joined the North Korean Joseon Labor Council before, and actually acquired the North Korean nationality, and North Korea permits dual nationality, the defendant who has the North Korean nationality should be treated as a national in applying the National Security Act to the defendant who has the North Korean nationality.

Fifth, since the North Korean representative body in Vietnam can be deemed to be the extension of the territory of North Korea as the area of the territory of North Korea as the area of the territory of North Korea in accordance with international practices or agreements, the crimes in this country must be treated as "domestic crimes."

(3) As to the fact that he/she takes the lead in holding a unification academic conference and participated in it, thereby engaging in guidanceal duties for anti-government organizations.

As seen earlier, the Defendant arranged the above Uniform Academic Conference and responded to it by the North Korea. The above Uniform Academic Conference constitutes a case where there is a clear danger that may harm the existence and security of the State or democratic fundamental order. It is clear that the Defendant and North Korea have led to holding the above Uniform Academic Conference and determined that the act of participating in it was the Defendant’s duty of acting in South and North Korea, which is an anti-government organization. Thus, it shall be deemed that the Defendant’s act of acting in the guiding duty for North Korea, which is an anti-government organization.

B. As to the sentencing

The sentence of the court below is too weak.

Ⅱ H. H. H. H. H.

As to the part on which the defendant and the prosecutor found the defendant guilty by each item of the facts charged in this case, the prosecutor has filed an assertion of misunderstanding of legal principles or misunderstanding of facts as to the part on which the defendant found the defendant not guilty in the original trial, and otherwise has filed an assertion of unfair sentencing in common. For the convenience of description and understanding, the defendant's appeal concerning the unconstitutionality and invalidation of the National Security Act, which is the applicable law of this case, which is the premise of the trial, shall be determined first, and then, in case where the defendant and the prosecutor's arguments of misunderstanding of legal principles or misunderstanding of facts are without merit after examining each item of the facts charged, the last part on which

1. Determination on the unconstitutionality and invalidity of the National Security Act

A. The norm of the National Security Act

(1) As well known, the National Security Act can be deemed as a product of defensive democracy that the so-called "it is impossible to grant freedom to the enemy threateninging freedom." Although it cannot be concluded that North Korea completely renounced our free democracy system, North Korea still has the nature of anti-government organizations to ensure the safety of free democracy and freedom of democracy as well as to ensure the safety and security of the nation's living, by taking into account various aspects, such as cooperation and science, broadcasting, sports, religion, culture, etc., including the Geum Riversan Tourism and the Gisung Industrial Complex. However, the Korean Peninsula still has one of the most military tension areas in the world where the two Koreas conflict with each other under the different system, and it cannot be concluded that North Korea renounced completely the unification route of our free democracy system.

(2) However, in the process of applying the National Security Act, there were cases where this Act was somewhat abused under the past authoritative authority authority in order to maintain the regime rather than the existence and security of the nation, and accordingly, Article 1(2) was newly established at the time of the amendment on May 31, 191, stating that “In interpreting and interpreting this Act, it shall be limited to the minimum necessary to achieve the purpose of paragraph (1), and it shall not be extended and interpreted or unfairly restricting the fundamental human rights of the people guaranteed by the Constitution”. Thus, in order to properly maintain the normativeity of the National Security Act under the changed inter-Korean relations, it is necessary to apply it carefully only when there is an obvious risk that may harm the national existence and security or democratic fundamental order.

B. Whether the National Security Act is unconstitutional or invalid

The principle of international peace and peaceful unification declared by the Constitution in Articles 4 and 5 is premised on the premise that it does not undermine the fundamental principles of our Constitution, which are the fundamental order of free democracy. Thus, in a clear situation where North Korea is still threatening to the fundamental order of our free democracy, the National Security Act for the purpose of securing the safety, survival and freedom of the nation by regulating anti-state activities which endanger the national security, cannot be deemed to violate the Constitution. The concept of the elements of each crime under the National Security Act, which reasonably interpret the provisions of the National Security Act in light of the purpose of the Act, cannot be deemed to violate the fundamental contents of the principle of no punishment without the law, because the concept of the elements of the crime under the National Security Act is ambiguous and broad, and thus, the freedom of conscience, press and publication, etc. are not all fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution, but if necessary for the national security, maintenance of order or public welfare under Article 37(2) of the Constitution, it may be limited to the extent that it does not infringe on the essential contents of the freedom and rights, as seen above.

C. Ultimately, the defendant's assertion on this point is without merit.

2. Judgment on the facts charged under paragraph (1)

A. Summary of the facts charged

The summary of this part of the facts charged is as follows: (a) the defendant joined the North Korean Joseon Labor Association on September 1973 and was appointed as a candidate for the political bureau of the South Korean Labor Party, an anti-government organization, with the designation of Kim Il-il on May 1991; and (b) on December 1988, the monthly newspaper published in the Republic of Korea on and around how to see North Korea; (c) on October 14, 2002, the defendant argued the so-called inherent methodology, including how to see North Korea, and how to recognize North Korea properly; and (d) on October 14, 2002, the defendant announced various conveniences through the Korean daily newspaper and the magazine and the publication, thereby holding several conveniences until the date of publication of the writing of "finite of the boundary person's deceased" to cite the North Korean system as part of the anti-government organization's activities to promote unification; and (d) on August 23, 1994, Defendant 200's own participation in the National Assembly.

(b) Prosecution of the defendant;

The defendant, on September 1973, did not have been appointed as a candidate for the political branch of the North Korean Labor Party on or around May 1991. The defendant's participation in the North Korean Joseon Labor Party does not change the fact that he joined the North Korean Joseon Labor Party on or around September 1971, and that he has arranged various literary activities such as the contents stated in this part of the facts charged, and participated in it on six occasions, or that it was made for pure academic purposes. Thus, it is not a guiding duty to conduct the North Korean unification publicity.

(c) Points in dispute;

(1) Article 3 (1) 2 of the National Security Act provides that punishment shall be imposed upon death penalty, imprisonment for life, or imprisonment with prison labor for not less than five years for a person who has been engaged in the role of an anti-government organization as a candidate for a member of a political party in North Korea. In light of the above provision of the Act, if the defendant is found to have been appointed as a candidate for a political party in North Korea, the candidate for a political party in the Joseon Labor Party, which is an anti-government organization, naturally falls under the status of an anti-government organization, regardless of need not be followed. Thus, if the defendant is not acknowledged to have been appointed as a candidate for a political party in North Korea, it must be considered whether the above act of the defendant constitutes a guiding duty for an anti-government organization under the above provision.

(2) Therefore, in the lower court, first of all, determined the unconstitutionality of Article 3(1)2 of the National Security Act, which the Defendant asserted as the reason for appeal, and then, determined the above issues, namely, whether the Defendant was appointed as a candidate for the political bureau member of the North Korea Joseon Labor Party, an anti-government organization, and if such facts are not acknowledged, whether the Defendant’s pro-North Korea learning activities, the unification academic conference’s good offices, and the participation activities constituted a guiding duty for North Korea, an anti-government organization should be determined in turn.

D. Whether Article 3 (1) 2 of the National Security Act is unconstitutional

First, the above legal provision refers to a person who assists in the leader and directs all or part of activities to fulfill the purpose of an anti-government organization, and the "person who has been engaged in other leading duties" refers to a person who actually plays an important role in the organization and activities of an anti-government organization, such as guiding members in accordance with the ideology and policy of an anti-government organization or performing duties essential for the existence and purpose of an anti-government organization. Thus, the above concept cannot be deemed to infringe on the principle of clarity, which is the essential substance of the principle of no punishment without the law, at the time of its rational interpretation as seen above. Second, it cannot be said that there is a possibility that the right of equality may be infringed upon due to the arbitrary and convenient legal use of the judicial authority, as seen above, by examining the norm of the National Security Act. Third, it cannot be said that there is no violation of the principle of no excessive prohibition of peaceful unification and the basic substance of the defendant's right as seen above.

E. Whether the defendant was appointed as a candidate for the political party of the North Korean Joseon Labor Party, an officer of anti-government organization

(1) As to whether the facts charged are specified

First of all, this part of the facts charged that "the defendant was appointed as a candidate for the political party of the North Korean political party of the South Korean political party, the executive officer of anti-government organization, by the designation of Kim Il-il at that time after he was given a single interview on May 24, 1991 with the recognition of his contribution to the dissemination of the idea of subject through inherent approach, the maintenance and strengthening of the North Korean system, and the North Korean system's contribution to pro-North Korea's pro-North Korea activities in Europe, which have been recognized on May 24, 191."

The purpose of the law, which specifies the time, place, and method of a crime, is to limit the object of a trial to the court and to facilitate the exercise of the right of defense by specifying the scope of defense against the defendant. Thus, even if the time, place, method, etc. of a crime are not clearly stated in the indictment, it is sufficient that the facts constituting the crime are stated to the extent that it can be distinguished from other facts by integrating these elements, and even if the date, place, method, etc. of a crime are not indicated in the indictment, it does not go against the purport of the law that specifies the facts charged as above and if it is inevitable in light of the nature of the crime, the prosecution cannot be deemed unlawful even if the contents of the indictment are not specified (see Supreme Court en banc Decision 2002Do2939, Oct. 11, 2002; Supreme Court Decision 2002Do807, Jun. 20, 2002). In light of these legal principles, this part of the facts charged cannot be seen as not impeding the defendant's right of defense.

(2) Examination of evidence relations

(A) Among the evidence duly examined and adopted by the court below, the major evidence as shown in this part of the facts charged lies in ① the interrogation protocol of the defendant prepared by the prosecutor, ② the part concerning the full statement from Nonindicted 1’s investigation agency and the court of the court below, ③ two computer diskettes copied by Nonindicted 6 (No. 1; hereinafter “the instant diskettes”) and each North Korea Report of Nonindicted 4, a document printed out by Nonindicted 6, ④ one document written by the defendant (No. 15).

First of all, the above evidence argues that each suspect interrogation protocol of the defendant prepared by the prosecutor is admissible under the condition that the presence of the defense counsel is not allowed or that the interrogation is conducted under the circumstances that do not guarantee the right to participate in the interrogation, and that the pertinent statement in the investigation agency of the non-indicted 1 and the court below or the print-out document of this case are hearsay evidence. Therefore, the suspect under the interpretation of Articles 34, 89 and 209 of the Criminal Procedure Act has the right to demand the presence of the defense counsel in the interrogation process by the judicial police officer or the prosecutor, and therefore, the suspect interrogation protocol of the suspect prepared by the investigation agency without the presence of the defense counsel is inadmissible as evidence collected by the non-indicted 3 and the suspect interrogation protocol prepared by the non-indicted 1 and the suspect interrogation protocol prepared by the non-indicted 3 cannot be admitted as admissible under the interpretation of the current Criminal Procedure Act even if the above provisions are clearly defined as "the defendant or the suspect detained," and thus, it cannot be admitted that the suspect's right to participate in the interrogation protocol prepared by the prosecutor cannot be admitted.

Furthermore, this paper will examine the specific statement of each of the above evidence and its probative value in order.

First, according to the contents of each protocol of examination of the accused prepared by the public prosecutor, the accused did not know the fact that ○○○ was a candidate for a political party. It is customary that the list of the members of a socialist State was announced in the order of ordinary political party members, candidate members, and secretary. The accused came to know that ○○○○ was a candidate for a political party member since the list was in the middle of parliamentary members and secretary. However, there was no regular notification from North Korea. However, there was no fact that the accused was working as a candidate for a political party member. In fact, there was no fact that he was working as a candidate for a political party member. According to time and logic, North Korea’s appointment of the accused as a candidate for a political party member was 7 days before the date of 194, but there was no fact that she was notified of the fact that he was a candidate for a political party member, such as the date he was given notification of the fact that she was an honorary candidate for a political party member(s).

However, examining the contents of the above interrogation protocol in detail as a whole, the prosecutor may find the defendant as the candidate for the political party in Joseon Labor at the beginning to be the candidate for the political party in advance and examine him on the premise thereof (e.g., when the defendant knows the fact that he was appointed as the candidate for the political party in the second interrogation, the suspect must be aware of the fact that he was the candidate for the political party in the second interrogation; "I think that North Korea has designated the suspect as the candidate for the political party in North Korea at any time," "I think that the suspect was the candidate for the political party in North Korea"; "I think that the reason why he was appointed as the candidate for the political party in North Korea is what is the candidate for the political party in North Korea," and there is no notification from the North Korean authority that the defendant was appointed as the candidate for the political party in advance. However, it cannot be said that the defendant made a confession from North Korea to ○○○'s political party in his own part of the list of candidates for the political party in question.

Second, around May 191, Non-Indicted 1 offered a consistent testimony between the defendant and Non-Indicted 1 at the Seoul District Court's 98 Gohap86702 claim, and the investigative agency of this case and the court of original judgment. ① At the time of the request of Non-Indicted 2, the head of the Uniform Cable Department at the time of the 1991 when he was in office as the head of the International Department of Research and Development, Non-Indicted 1 provided that Non-Indicted 2 would be able to provide education on the subject thought, and Non-Indicted 1 would be able to comply with the request of Non-Indicted 1, and Non-Indicted 1, Non-Indicted 2, Non-Indicted 9, Non-Indicted 9, Non-Indicted 1, 200, Non-Indicted 9, 200, 3 Non-Indicted 9, 3, who was in office as the head of the Unindicted 1, 200, and 9, 3000.

On the other hand, each of the above statements made by Nonindicted Party 1 may be deemed to be highly reliable when considering the career and motive of his own North Korea, and the fact that there is no reason to harm the defendant by manipulating any false facts. However, among the specialized statements related to this part of the facts charged, it is unclear how the contents of the statement made by the said Nonindicted Party 2 are as follows: (i) the specific contents of how the statement made by the said Nonindicted Party 2 was made because the defendant was merely “I would make great use in the above"; and (ii) the part made by the said Nonindicted Party 3 was made from the above Nonindicted Party 3. According to the records, it is recognized that the above Nonindicted Party 3 was appointed as an international secretary for the Japanese Labor Party on May 190 and worked as the senior secretary for the Japanese Labor Party on December 12, 1992, and the defendant was appointed as the senior secretary for the Japanese Labor Party on the first day to the North Korea’s office, and thus, it can be easily recognized that the above defendant was not the person in charge of the above Nonindicted Party 3’s position.

셋째, 이 사건 디스켓 및 그 출력문서인 각 대북보고문은 1994. 9. 말경 내지 같은 해 10. 초순경 독일 주재 북한 이익대표부의 2등 서기관으로 발령받아 1997. 12. 말경까지 근무한 북한의 통일전선부 소속 공작원인 공소외 4가 작성하였다고 인정되는 문건으로서, 북한 당국에 대하여 당시 독일에 거주하고 있는 교포나 유학생과 조국통일범민족연합유럽본부(이하 ‘범유본’이라 한다) 등 친북단체들의 동향을 파악하고 이를 조정하는 등의 활동 상황을 보고하고 그들에 대한 향후 대책 의견을 제시하는 내용의 글인바, 그 중 이 부분 공소사실에 부합하는 듯한 피고인과 관련한 보고내용은, ① “특히 그는 자기가 조국과 련계되어 있다는 것을 비밀에 붙이면서 자기 나름대로의 통일운동을 하려고 하는 조건에서 앞으로도 그와의 사업은 지금과 같이 비공개로 하겠는지 아니면 그가 공개적인 활동을 하도록 유도하겠는지 명백한 선을 세워가지고 그와의 사업을 짜고들어 하는 것이 필요하다고 보아집니다”(‘1996년도 독일주재실 사업총화보고서’ 중에서, 수사기록 제6552쪽), ② “자기는 그래도 지금까지 30여년간 조국과 련계되어 일해오고 있다는 것, 조국과의 관계에서 자기는 공소외 45처럼 조국에 대해 자기의 주견을 강하게 요구할 줄도 모르고 또 공소외 67처럼 조국에 가서 입으로 나팔을 불 줄도 모른다는 것, 자기가 이런 말을 해서 안되었지만 자기가 제기하는 문제와 관련하여 조국에서 너무도 련락이 늦고 그래서 기다리노라면 이번 베이징 토론회와 같은 엉뚱한 일이 생기고 하니 너무 답답하여 이런 말을 한다는 것, 그래서 자기가 이번 사건과 관련하여 지난 시기 조국과 사업해 온 데 대해 총화해 보면서 눈물도 많이 흘렸다는 것, 그 전에는 조국일군들이 자기가 제기하는 문제들에 대해서 매우 심중하게 대해주고 신속하게 련락을 보내오곤 하였다는 것, 그런데 지금 조국에서 일하는 일군들은 무슨 문제를 제기하여도 제때에 대답을 주지 않으니 리해가 안된다는 것”(‘송두율과의 면담정형과 대책적 의견’ 중에서, 수사기록 제6566쪽), “자기의 신분위장을 위하여 지금 가명을 쓰고 있는데 지금은 자기가 이전에 조국에 다녔다는 것도 공개되었고, 또 북남간의 토론회를 주관한다는 것을 사람들이 다 아는 조건에서 이 가명을 쓰겠는가 하는 문제가 제기된다는 것, 그래서 조국에서는 자기의 가명으로 되어 있는 문건들을 다 따로 정리하여 두고 이제부터는 자기의 본명을 가지고 련계련락을 해 주기 바란다는 것”(‘송두율과의 면담정형과 대책적 의견’ 중에서, 수사기록 제6567쪽), ③ “황가( 공소외 1을 가리킴)가 자기가 우리 당중앙의 지도기관성원이라는데 대해 알고 있는가 하는 것이 기본문제라는 것, 이에 대해서 조국에서는 어떻게 보고 있는가를 알고 싶다고 하였습니다. 주재성원은 그 문제에 대하여 조국에서는 황가가 알고 있지 않는 것으로 보고 있으며 앞으로 그런 문제가 제기되면 모략선전으로 강하게 반박해 나서야 한다고 말해주었습니다”(‘송두율 부부를 만난 정형과 대책적 의견’ 중에서, 수사기록 제6570쪽), ④ “송두율은 지난해에 황가놈 사건과 관련하여 자기의 신분이 로출되지 않겠는가 하는 문제, 훔볼트 종합대학 림시교수직에서 해직된 문제, 자기가 제시한 학자토론회에 대하여 조국에서 추진해 주지 않는 문제를 가지고 매우 신경을 쓰면서 완전히 모든 것을 자포자기하고 미국에 가서 생계나 유지하기 위한 방향에서 사고를 하는 데까지 이르게 되었습니다”(문서명 불상, 파일명 ‘QJA.BAK’ 중에서, 수사기록 제6882쪽), ⑤ “송두율은 지난해 9월 9·9절을 계기로 자기가 경애하는 장군님께 편지를 올린데 대해 로동신문에 공개한 다음부터 조국에 대해 공개적으로 의견을 부리기 시작하였으며, 그 후 올해 2월 중순부터 황가사건으로 몹시 불안해 하다가 조국에서 자기가 년초에 제기한 통일토론회에 대해서는 별로 관심을 두지 않고 예상치 않게 다른 경로를 통하여 6월말 베이징에서 토론회가 진행되게 되는 것과 관련하여 매우 불쾌해 하면서 조국에서 자기를 어떻게 보는가 하는 문제로까지 신경을 쓰면서 이것으로 하여 남조선 운동권 내에서 자기의 위신이 땅바닥에 떨어졌다는 것, 자기도 이제는 조국과의 관계에서 단호한 결심을 내리겠다고까지 의견을 가지게 되었습니다”(문서명 불상, 파일명 ‘WOWJ.BAK’ 중에서, 수사기록 제6992쪽)라고 기재한 부분 등이다.

이 사건 디스켓의 입수경위에 관한 공소외 6의 수사기관 및 원심 법정에서의 각 진술과 원심 법원의 외교통상부장관에 대한 사실조회 결과, 각 조선신보(증제18 내지 22호)의 각 기재 등을 종합하면, 위 공소외 6은 1994년경 범유본에 가입하여 위 단체의 기관지 “조국은 하나”의 편집을 맡았고 그 과정에서 위 공소외 4와 수시로 접촉하였는데, 위 공소외 4는 1995. 11.경 펜티엄 컴퓨터를 구입하여 이를 위 기관지 편집용으로 사용하도록 위 공소외 6에게 교부하였다가 1996. 8.경 위 범유본 회원들 사이에 내분이 생기자 위 컴퓨터를 회수하여 간 사실, 이에 위 공소외 6은 중고 286컴퓨터를 구입하여 사용하다가 1997. 1. 하순경 위 공소외 4에게 전에 회수하여 간 펜티엄 컴퓨터를 위 기관지의 편집용으로 사용할 수 있도록 해달라고 요청하여 같은 해 2. 1. 위 공소외 4로부터 다시 위 펜티엄컴퓨터를 교부받고 그 대신 자신의 중고 286컴퓨터를 위 공소외 4에게 교부하였는데, 그 무렵 위 펜티엄컴퓨터의 저장장치(하드디스크)에 백업화일(＊.BAK)로 저장되어 있던 이 사건 각 대북보고문을 발견하고 이를 이 사건 디스켓 중 1개에 복사하였던 사실, 그 후 위 공소외 6은 1997. 12. 말경 위 공소외 4가 북한으로 돌아간다는 말을 듣고 위 공소외 4에게 컴퓨터를 교환하자고 제의하여 위 공소외 4로부터 자신의 286컴퓨터를 돌려받아 또다시 위 286컴퓨터의 하드디스크에 백업화일(＊. BAK)로 저장되어 있던 이 사건 각 대북보고문을 이 사건 디스켓 중 다른 1개에 복사한 사실, 위 공소외 6은 이미 1995년 가을경부터 범유본 회원들 사이의 내분으로 인하여 축출될 위기에 처해 있었는데 위와 같이 우연히 입수하게 된 이 사건 디스켓의 내용을 보고서 추후에 귀국할 때 가져갈 생각으로 이를 보관하고 있다가 1998. 2.경 위 범유본에서 제명당하자 같은 해 10. 18. 대한민국으로 입국하면서 당시 국가안전기획부에 이 사건 디스켓을 제출하였는바, 그러자 작성자인 위 공소외 4는 1999. 1.경 미국으로 망명하였고, 북한은 같은 해 1. 19. 조국평화통일위원회 명의로 위 공소외 6이 위 공소외 4의 컴퓨터 입력자료를 절취하였다면서 대한민국을 강도 높게 비난하는 내용의 성명을 발표한 사실 등을 인정할 수 있으며, 위 각 대북보고문의 기재내용을 보더라도 피고인과 위 공소외 4가 아니면 알 수 없는 사항들이 대부분으로서 피고인 역시 수사기관과 원심 및 당심 법정에서 위 각 대북보고문은 사실인 부분도 있고 또 사실보다 과장된 부분도 있으며 위 공소외 4가 북한에 보고하기 위하여 북한식의 언어로 표현하고 있기는 하나 대체로 위 공소외 4와 그러한 취지의 대화를 나눈 사실이 있다고 진술하고 있는바, 위와 같은 입수경위와 그 기재 내용, 여러 가지 주변의 정황 등에 비추어 위 각 대북보고문은 일응 신빙성이 매우 높은 증거라고 하겠다.

그러나 위 각 대북보고문의 구체적인 기재 내용에 의하더라도, 역시 피고인이 오랜 기간 동안 북한과 연락을 맺고 비밀리에 북한을 위한 친북활동을 해 온 사실을 인정할 여지는 있지만, 나아가 피고인이 조선노동당 정치국 후보위원으로 선임된 사실을 인정하기에는 여러 가지 의문점이 발견된다. 즉, ① 비록 위 각 대북보고문 중 피고인이 자기가 ‘지도기관성원’인 사실을 공소외 1이 알고 있는지 여부 때문에 불안해 한다는 부분이 있기는 하나, 정작 피고인은 자신이 이러한 말을 한 적이 없다고 일관되게 부인하고 있는 점, ② 지도기관성원이 바로 조선노동당 정치국 후보위원임을 인정할 명확한 자료도 없을 뿐더러, 지도기관성원이라는 용어는 위 각 대북보고문 중에서 단 한차례 등장할 뿐이고 오히려 그 기재내용을 전체적으로 보면 북한에서는 피고인을 조선노동당의 정치국 후보위원으로서는 전혀 격에 맞지 않게 대남공작의 대상인 이른바 ‘상층통전대상’(고급 통일전선전술의 대상)으로 취급하고 있었음을 알 수 있는 점, ③ 위 각 대북보고문의 기재 내용 곳곳에는 “송두율은 올해에 들어와서 조국에서 지난 시기처럼 자금도 제대로 대주지 않는데 대해 일정하게 신경을 쓰고 있으면서 적들의 조국에 대한 온갖 비방중상에 귀를 기울이고 또한 놈들의 꾀임수에 마음의 동요를 일으키면서”(‘1996년도 독일주재실 사업총화보고서’ 중에서, 수사기록 제6551쪽), “그리고 그는 조국의 일군들과 학자들이 남조선의 현실을 너무도 모른다느니, 주관주의가 많다느니 하면서 비꼬는 소리를 자주 하곤 하는데 이와 관련하여 주재성원은 그에게 한번 짭짤하게 말해 주려고 하다가도 그것으로 인하여 그가 삐뚤어질 것이 우려되므로 앞으로 기회를 보아서 올바른 인식을 가지도록 말해주려고 합니다”(‘1996년도 독일주재실 사업총화보고서’ 중에서, 수사기록 제6553쪽), “그가 위대한 수령님 서거 3돐과 관련하여 조국방문을 하지 않는 것이 괘씸하기는 하지만 정세변화와 기분상태에 따라서 이렇게 저렇게 행동하는 것이 통전대상이라는 점을 고려하여 그가 8월에 조국에 가면 따뜻히 대해주고 제기하는 문제들도 풀어줄 것은 풀어주는 것이 앞으로 그와 사업하는데 좋을 것으로 봅니다”(문서명 불상, 파일명 ‘WOWJ.BAK’ 중에서, 수사기록 제6992쪽)라는 등의 표현을 찾아볼 수 있는바, 만일 피고인이 실제로 조선노동당 정치국 후보위원으로 선임되었다면 후술하는 그 지위나 권력서열에 비추어 일개 이등서기관에 불과한 위 공소외 4로서는 도저히 피고인에게 위와 같이 한번 짭짤하게 말해 주려고 했다거나 피고인이 괘씸하다고 하는 등의 극히 하대적인 표현을 구사할 수 없을 것이라고 보이는 점 등에서 합리적인 의심들을 배제하기 어렵다.

Fourth, according to the letter written by the Defendant on August 15, 1995, “I find the logic of unification,” the title “The continuity and Change of the power structure of North Korea Labor Party’s North Korea Labor Party” indicates the position of ○○○○ as a political party member under the title “The continuity and Change of the Power Structure of North Korea Labor Party’s North Korea Labor Party” (hereinafter “National Committee”) (Article 856 of the Investigation Records), and the Defendant recognizes the fact that ○○○○ as a member of the above funeral’s committee directly is the name of the Defendant. Accordingly, there is room to deem that the Defendant itself recognizes the fact that ○○○ as a candidate for the political party member.

그러나 피고인이 검사 작성의 제2회 피의자신문조서에서 “북한에 들어가기 전에는 ○○○가 정치국 후보위원인 사실을 알지 못했다. 사회주의 국가의 장의위원 명단은 통상 정치국 정위원, 후보위원, 그리고 비서의 순으로 발표되는 것이 관례인데 피고인은 장의위원 명단에서 ○○○가 정위원과 비서의 중간에 위치해 있었기 때문에 피고인이 노동당 정치국 후보위원이라는 것을 알게 되었다”라고 진술하고 있는 점에 비추어 볼 때, 이는 피고인의 변소대로 피고인이 장의위원 명단을 북한의 권력서열과 동일시하여 북한 당국이 자신을 정치국 후보위원급으로 대우해 주는 것이라고 미루어 생각하고 별다른 의식 없이 위와 같이 기재한 것이 아닐까 하는 강한 의심이 든다. 또한 당심 증인 공소외 8, 원심 증인 공소외 9의 각 진술에 의하면, 위와 같이 장의위원의 서열에 따라서 국가권력의 서열을 추정하는 방법은 이른바 ‘크레믈린놀러지’라고 하여 과거 서방에서의 공산권 서열분석방법을 따른 것인데, 실제로는 당해 행사의 성격에 따라 그 서열이 조금씩 다를 수 있고 때로는 전혀 권력서열과 관련이 없는 인사도 그 서열에 오를 수 있기 때문에 이것만으로 국가권력의 서열을 추정하기는 어렵다는 것이며, 더구나 위 기재사항은 그 표현형식에 있어 장의위원 명단을 분류표에 담고 그 위원별 직책을 기호로 표시한 것이어서 그 기술과정에서 얼마든지 오류가 생길 수도 있다는 점에서 더욱 그러하다. 따라서 이러한 서적의 기술내용만으로 피고인이 조선노동당 정치국 후보위원이라고 단정하기에도 매우 곤란하다.

(B) On the other hand, considering the statements of Nonindicted Party 8, Nonindicted Party 10, and Nonindicted Party 9-2 and the fact-finding results of the court of the original instance, North Korea is a socialist system in which the Joseon Labor Party is taking advantage of all sovereign power (see Article 21 of the Protocol). Since the above rally is not opened every year (ordinaryly, once 10 years thereafter, no one has been opened until now), the "Central Committee" was acting as the highest executive organ for the 19th anniversary of the fact-finding of the 19th Central Committee, and the 2nd Central Committee was held by the 19th Central Committee, and the 19th Central Committee was held by the 2nd Central Committee of the 19th Central Committee, and the 2nd Central Committee was held by the 19th Central Committee of the 2nd Central Committee of the 19th Central Committee and the 2nd Committee of the 2nd Central Committee of the 19th Central Committee.

In light of the above facts of recognition, the following questions arise to recognize the defendant as a candidate for the political party of the North Korean Joseon Labor Party.

First, the defendant, who has German nationality, failed to meet the basic qualification requirements to become a candidate for a political party because he was not elected as a central member of the Central Committee of the Party of the North Korean Labor Party.

Second, even if North Korea is practically able to designate a specific person as a candidate for a political party by an Kim Il-sung's will regardless of the procedure stipulated in the rules of the Joseon Labor Party, as a one-person model with the concentration of all power over Kim Il-il, as long as North Korea refers not only to a simple confidential organization, but at least to externally attend the country, and advocates legal procedure by establishing the Constitution and the labor party rules, as above, it would be reasonable to follow ex officio election or announcement procedures after the appointment of candidate for a political party by the individual intention of Kim Il-il, unless there are special circumstances. Accordingly, even if the defendant was appointed as a candidate for a political party on May 24, 191, and then appointed as a candidate for a political party by the nomination of Kim Il-il, the defendant's key position is that if he was not a candidate for a political party under the above 6th Central Committee on December 193, 199, he could not easily be held as a candidate for a political party candidate for which he had been appointed as a candidate for political party.

Third, as seen earlier, the members of the Joseon Labor Party in North Korea are the key position of the state power, and the persons falling thereunder are the highest leaders of North Korea or the first generation of Revolution, the Prime Minister or the Chief People's Council corresponding to the National Assembly. The Defendant did not have any such career or experience, and there was no contribution to North Korea as much as it would be favorable to such career. (In relation to this, the prosecutor asserts that the Defendant was appointed as the candidate for a political state because the Defendant was recognized as having contributed to spreading the principal ideology and maintaining and strengthening the North Korean system through pro-North Korea's pro-Japanese activities, but even according to the facts charged itself, the Defendant written and written before the Kim Il-il interview was published in Korea on December 198, 198, the Prosecutor's argument that " how to see North Korea, how to recognize North Korea, and how to understand North Korea's ideas and ideas," and that the remainder of this argument is not persuasive in that the prosecutor's 10th of this paper was fully friendly.

(3) Determination

(A) In a false criminal case, the proof of a crime must be based on the strict proof that there is no room for reasonable deliberation, and if the degree of proof does not reach that level, the interest of the defendant should be determined even if there is suspicion of guilt. Although this case is extremely limited to the free access of information in North Korea, which is one of the most closed societies in the earth, and there are various practical difficulties in the proof, the degree of strict proof required by the general principles of criminal law cannot be mitigated.

(B) In conclusion, as to whether a defendant was appointed as a candidate for the political party of the North Korean political party in the above legal doctrine, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone, as examined earlier, does not seem to have any doubt of guilt, but it is difficult to view this part of the facts charged as a whole to have been strictly proven to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt in view of the whole, and therefore, this part of the facts charged cannot be acknowledged. The defendant's assertion in

(f) Whether the defendant's activities can be assessed as having engaged in the guiding duties for North Korea, which is an anti-government organization

(1) The premise for the determination

(A) As seen earlier, insofar as it is not recognized that the Defendant was appointed as a candidate for the political branch of the North Korean political branch of the Joseon Labor Party, there is a question as to whether the Defendant’s activities can be evaluated as engaging in the guiding duty for the North Korean government, which is an anti-government organization. In this regard, there are various individual facts as to the Defendant’s activities, but the written indictment appears to contain that the Defendant’s activities should be arranged to hold the Defendant’s pro-North guard activities and to participate in the unification academic conference on the third trial date, and thus, the prosecutor stated that the above two activities should be determined.

(B) To determine this, first of all, the legal concept of "person engaged in guiding duties" should be clearly established. As seen earlier, it is reasonable to define that person who actually plays an important role in the organization and activities of an anti-government organization, such as prohibiting any status in an anti-government organization and guiding members in accordance with the ideology and policy of an anti-government organization or performing duties essential for the existence and achievement of an anti-government organization (see Supreme Court Decision 95Do1148 delivered on July 25, 1995). In addition, if multiple and comprehensive concept provisions are applied to specific cases, punishment rights may be abused by arbitrary interpretation. Thus, the National Security Act provides that the National Security Act shall be interpreted for the purpose of securing the safety, survival and freedom of citizens (Article 1(1) of the same Act), and it shall be interpreted to the minimum extent necessary to interpret this Act, and it shall not be applied to the case where it is unreasonably limited to the fundamental order of the nation's existence and fundamental order or its purpose.

(2) As to the Defendant’s pro-North Korea drinking activity

(A) Acknowledgement of facts

The Defendant acknowledges the fact that the Defendant engaged in literary activities, such as the written facts in this part of the facts charged, and this is supported by all evidence, such as the author, etc., which is the relevant work, and therefore, all of them can be recognized as is.

(B) L. H.D.

우선 구체적인 저술내용 중 특히 문제로 삼을 만한 주요 부분들을 발췌해 보면 다음과 같다. 즉, ① 1991. 6. 29.부터 같은 해 7. 5.까지 3회에 걸쳐 〈한겨레신문〉에 기고한 “평양에서의 강의”라는 제하의 북한 방문기에, “나는 몇 번의 강연과 토론에서 북의 주체사상이 북의 내재적 요구에 의해서 설명되고 전개되어 왔으나, 온갖 사상조류가 밀려오고 밀려나가는 남한사회에서 이러한 사조들과 만나고 부딪혀서 그 생명력을 보여주었을 때만, 남북통일에 있어서도 주체사상의 위상은 인정받을 수 있을 것이라고 강조하였다”, “조선의 실정에 맞게 전개된 ‘우리식 사회주의’는 혁명과 건설에서 주체사상을 중심으로 통일된 사상적 무장 위에서 전개되었기 때문에 외부세계로부터 불어오는 바람에 흔들릴 염려가 없었고, 앞으로도 그럴 것이라고 내가 만난 북쪽 사람은 열이면 열 확신에 차서 주장했다”라고 기술하고, ② 1994. 7. 21.자 〈한겨레21〉에 기고한 “김주석 죽음, 그 이후 북한은 곧 붕괴한다? - 엉뚱한 정보에나 의존하는 서글픈 시나리오”라는 제하의 글에, “식민주의와 제국주의의 지배로부터 자기 민족을 해방시킨다는 의지와 실천은 김 주석의 전 생애를 규정한 시대정신이라고 말할 수 있다. … 민족해방과 강대국이 지배하는 세계질서를 개편하려는 제3세계와 비동맹세력은 바로 이러한 김 주석이 추구했던 ‘시대적 공동체’의 정신을 높이 평가했다고 말할 수 있다”라고 기술하고, ③ 1995. 5. 10. 〈도서출판 당대〉를 통해 펴낸 “역사는 끝났는가”라는 책자에, “북한의 ‘주체사회주의’ 또는 ‘우리식 사회주의’가 내걸고 있는 이상은 자주성의 원칙 위에 선 조선의 실정에 맞는 사회주의 건설이라고 흔히들 이야기한다”, “역사적인 인물이 ‘시대정신’의 산물이라는 말의 이면에는 역사적인 인물은 동시에 ‘시대적 공동체’의 정신을 만들어왔다는 적극적인 의미가 들어있다. … 따라서 식민주의와 제국주의의 지배로부터 자기 민족을 해방시킨다는 의지와 실천은 김 주석의 전생애를 규정한 ‘시대정신’이라고 말할 수 있다”, “자주성. 창조성 그리고 의식성을 인간의 본질로 파악하는 주체사상은 그 형성과정이 보여주듯이, 식민지적 질곡으로부터 해방투쟁을 거쳐 국토분단이라는 상황하에서 북한이 사회주의 혁명과 건설을 추진하는 데서 제기된 복잡한 문제를 해결하는 북한 사회주의의 총노선의 핵심이라고 할 수 있다”, “진정으로 위대한 사상은 바로 시련기에 진가를 드러낸다. 주체사상이 현재 북한이 처한 여러 난관을 돌파하는 강력한 무기로서 그 생명력을 보여줄 수 있을 때 통일 한반도의 역사 속에서는 물론 인간해방을 지향한 인류의 모든 사상적 노력의 좌표 위에도 정당한 평가에 따른 주체사상의 위상은 기록될 것이다.”, “(남한의 상황) 특히 노동과 자본의 철저한 이중구조적 ‘분할’을 통해서 숙련노동, 남성노동력, 대기업 등을 자본주의의 ‘기능적 핵’으로 삼고 이에 종속된 미숙련노동, 여성노동력, 중소기업을 이러한 핵기능에 철저히 종속시키고 계열화하는 현상은 학력과 성별, 임금격차는 물론 열세한 중소기업에 대한 빈약한 국가의 지원정책에도 나타났다”라고 기술하고, ④ 1995. 8. 15. 〈한겨레신문사〉를 통해 펴낸 “통일의 논리를 찾아서”라는 책자에, “북한사회에서 김 주석은 유일무이한 인격으로서 지역이나 사회계층의 차이를 넘어선 강한 공감대를 결집해 낼 수 있었다. 김 주석은 북한 사람들에게 칼 슈미트가 이야기하는 ‘대지에 뿌리내린 빨치산’의 덕목과 우리의 전통 속에서 특히 강조되고 있는 할아버지가 풍기는 따스함을 결합시킨 인격으로 보이고 있다”, “북한 사회주의를 떠받치고 있는 정당성의 핵심인 주체사상은 제3세계 주변부라는 정체성에 대한 철저한 자기긍정으로 인하여 생긴 일련의 부정적인 결과에도 불구하고, 정치·경제·국방 등의 영역에서 자주와 자립을 고수할 수 있었고, 이를 통해서 현실 사회주의의 붕괴로 인한 엄청난 충격으로부터 그들 스스로를 보호할 수 있었다”, “‘남한 모델’이 경제성장을 통해서 민족적 자부심을 높인 것은 사실이지만, 그것은 민족정체성을 확고히 하지 못했다는 결함을 가지고 있다. 그 이유중의 하나는 남한의 일방적인 대미종속성에 있다”라고 기술하고, ⑤ 2002. 10. 14. 〈한겨레신문사〉를 통해 펴낸 “경계인의 사색”이라는 책자에, “김정일 국방위원장을 중심으로 한 ‘단결’은 가령 ‘신경제’의 신화를 배경으로 몰아친 남쪽의 개인중심 ‘벤처’ 열풍과는 분명히 다른 종류의 ‘동력’이다. 집단적 열정은 사회주의 혁명과 건설에서 북이 늘 강조해 온 원칙이지만, 새 세기를 맞은 북이 새로운 ‘관계체계’를 형성하는 데서도 포기할 수 없다고 보는 그러한 동력은 밖의 세계에서는 신화처럼 보인다. 그러나 계몽만이 신화가 되는 것이 아니라 신화도 계몽의 역할을 한다는 변증법을 잊어서는 안될 것이다”라고 기술하였다.

Unlike the Defendant’s extreme change, it is difficult to view these literary parts as objectively described in the position of scholars who study the North Korean society under pure academic motive and purpose. Rather, in view of the overall content of the said works, the Defendant intentionally support and publicize the North Korean social system and the basic ideology thereof, or check out a consistent critical position with respect to the South Korean society in the process of misunderstanding and praiseing the political power of Kim Il-il and Kim Jong-il. Accordingly, it may be recognized that the Defendant has contributed to the maintenance and continuation of the North Korean system, an anti-government organization, as an anti-government organization.

However, even if all evidence were submitted by prosecutors, there is no evidence to view that the aforementioned activities of the Defendant were carried out in the position of members of the Joseon Labor Party, which is an anti-national organization or government organization, and furthermore, according to the evidence duly examined and adopted by the court below, the Defendant did not know about how to see North Korea society, and how to see the research methodology of North Korea under the North Korean society, i.e., "it is hard to view North Korea as being well as how to 8 North Korea's intellectual property and socialism," and there is no need to analyze the North Korea's new legal reasoning based on the viewpoint of the North Korea's internal perception that it was hard to recognize that it was an anti-state organization's 19th anniversary of the fact that it was widely known that it was an anti-state organization.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion pointing this out is with merit.

(3) On the intermediation and participation activities of the Defendant’s Uniform Science Conference

(A) Acknowledgement of facts

As stated in this part of the facts charged, the Defendant has arranged for the unification academic conference more than six times, and himself/herself has participated in the above unification academic conference as the head of the overseas delegation, and is supported by relevant evidence. As such, all of them can be recognized as it is.

(B) L. H.D.

The prosecutor asserts that the defendant's act of holding the above uniform academic conference and participating in it is carried out in order to externally publicize the plan for unification of North Korea in accordance with the promotion of the unification of South and North Korea, and in particular, to carry out the so-called unification publicity project against the progressive scholars of South and North Korea. In light of the purpose of anti-state activities, it should be deemed that the defendant has been engaged in guiding duties for anti-state organizations, which

On the other hand, in relation to the holding of the above Uniform Science Conference, the statement of Nonindicted 4 written by the prosecutor to the above Nonindicted 4, which the defendant submitted as its basis, is very important to consider this problem again in the early country because it is very important to organize these discussions in order to make it possible to directly hear the voices of the early country in order to give them a string against the conditions under which those who are against those who are under the nivers of the nivers group and those who are under the niverse of the nivers group and those who are under the niverse of the niverse group," (Article 666-67 of the investigation record), and (Article 65-67 of the North Korean investigation record). However, it is difficult to conclude that the defendant prepared the above statement to the above North Korean government with the aim of dividing the North Korea's opinions into the niverse group and the nivers group with the nivers group with the nivers group with the defendant.

Rather, according to the evidence duly admitted by the court below, the first unification academic conference was held at the first time by the proposal of the non-indicted 5, who is a South Korean student, and our scholars evaluation of its meaning and performance in order to continue to hold the above unification academic council in the future, the "Korean Unification Forum" was formed around April 1996, and the participants in the above unification academic conference continued to hold the 6th unification academic conference at the active request of the Republic of Korea. The participants in the above unification academic conference were "united" before attending the unification academic council, and all of the North Korean scholars and the Ministry of Unification reported the 6th unification academic conference to North Korea and approved the 6th unification academic cooperation among South and North Korean scholars' opinions. After the conclusion of the meeting, the defendants were unable to present the North Korean unification academic research council's opinion on the grounds that the 2nd unification academic cooperation between South and North Korea and the 3rd academic research council could not be seen as having been held in accordance with the above law.

G. Sub-committee

Thus, there is no evidence to acknowledge the facts charged that the defendant was appointed as a candidate for the political party of the Joseon Labor Party, which is an anti-government organization, as to the facts charged by the defendant, which is an anti-government organization, and it is difficult to view that the defendant's act of pro-North Korea or the holding of a unification academic council is an act acting as a broker for the defendant's pro-North Korea and participated in the activities, or that the participating activities corresponding to the above executives, and therefore

3. Judgment on the facts charged under paragraph (2)

A. Summary of the facts charged

The summary of this part of the facts charged is as follows: ① to receive the order of North Korea from May 10 to May 30 of the same year from May 1991 as an anti-government organization; ② to learn the principal ideology and to hold Kim Il-il at discussions, etc. on the subject thought by entering the private teaching institute of North Korea from May 10, 191 to May 30 of the same year; ② to enter the Republic of Korea for about one week from July 191 to the South Korea's Republic of Korea for approximately 1 week from July 1991, to the South 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'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'

B. Acknowledgement of facts

As to this part of the facts charged by the Defendant, except for the dispute that there was no “the purpose of accepting orders or holding consultations on the performance of the purpose”, the Defendant is aware of the pro-North Korea’s pro-North Korea upon the invitation of North Korea, and is supported by relevant evidence, all objective facts can be recognized.

(c) Whether there was an intention to receive and deliver orders or to consult on the accomplishment of purpose;

(1) Article 6 (2) of the National Security Act provides for the crime of special escape as stipulated in Article 6 (2) includes not only the case of receiving an order directly from an anti-government organization or a member thereof, but also the case of receiving an order again from a person who is subject to such order. In addition, the concept including an instruction and order does not necessarily require any control relationship with an order under the pretext of the order, and there is no restriction on the form of the order (see Supreme Court Decisions 9Do4027 delivered on December 28, 199, 97Do2084 delivered on November 25, 199).

(2) If the defendant has been informed with North Korea for a long time since he joined the North Korean Shipbuilding on September 19, 1973, among the facts charged, he met Kim Il-sung by having been invited five times as described in the above paragraphs (1) through (5) above, and contacted with the high-ranking authorities in charge of North Korea including Nonindicted 3, and discussed about the issue of receiving the operational funds of the pro-North Korean research organization from the North Korean authorities, it is reasonable to view that the main intention of his entrance was to receive an order or consult about the accomplishment of purpose from North Korea to maintain and maintain the North Korean co-operation, Kim Il-sung, Kim Il-il system, and Kim Il-il system. Accordingly, the defendant's act of pro-North Korea constitutes a special escape as defined in Article 6 (2) of the National Security Act, and whether the institution or person who invited the defendant has a control and control relationship between the defendant and the defendant, whether or not the defendant has been invited to collect the official academic data of the defendant, whether or not the defendant had an objective purpose of collecting this part of the criminal.

D. Whether there exists jurisdiction over each special escape after August 18, 1993 among the facts charged in this part

(1) The term "escape" under Article 6 (1) and (2) of the National Security Act refers to an act of self-government or entering into an area under the control of an anti-government organization by which the sovereignty of the Republic of Korea is actually exercised. However, three types of acts such as directly entering an area under the control of the above anti-government organization, entering a third country through which the sovereignty of the Republic of Korea is actually exercised, and entering a third country. In the case of simple escape under Article 6 (1) of the National Security Act, only entry into an area under the control of an anti-government organization is subject to punishment, and all of the above three acts are subject to punishment. However, in the case of special escape under Article 6 (2) of the National Security Act, entry into an area under the control of an anti-government organization does not vary from the area where the sovereignty of the Republic of Korea is actually exercised, and therefore, it does not change from the area where the sovereignty of the Republic of Korea is actually exercised to the area under the control of an anti-government organization.

In addition, Article 3 of the Constitution stipulates that the territory of the Republic of Korea shall be the Korean Peninsula and its annexed islands, and it is clear that North Korea also belongs to the territory of the Republic of Korea. As such, among the charges of this part of the charges that the defendant, who has German nationality, starting from Germany to obtain the order of North Korea and entering North Korea, came through the territory of the third country and the Republic of Korea after August 18, 1993, the defendant acquired German nationality. In this case, even though the defendant is a foreigner with German nationality, the penal provisions of the Republic of Korea shall be applied in accordance with Articles 2 and 4 of the Criminal Act, and it shall not be treated as a foreigner with German nationality as an overseas crime (see Supreme Court en banc Decision 97Do2021 delivered on November 20, 1997).

(2) Therefore, since the facts charged in this part shall have jurisdiction over the Republic of Korea, this part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

E. Whether Article 6 (2) of the National Security Act is unconstitutional

As seen above, the Defendant’s interpretation of the concept of “age” and “escape” as stipulated in the above provision constitutes an indefinite extension of the scope of punishment beyond the limit of the grammatic interpretation of the penal law and thus, it is contrary to the principle of clarity, which is the essential substance of the principle of no punishment without law, and thus, is unconstitutional and null. However, it is not necessary to understand the concept of “age” and “escape” under Article 6(2) of the National Security Act as the same meaning as the ordinary language meaning, and it does not go against the principle of clarity, which is the essential substance of the principle of no punishment without law. The Defendant’s assertion on this part is without merit.

F. Of the facts charged in this part, as to escape from the territory of anti-government organization on July 13, 1994

(1) As the current exchange between South and North Korea is active, mutual communication takes place through the invitation of South and North Korea in various fields, such as economy, science, broadcasting, sports, religion, culture, etc., since all acts of North Korea upon the invitation of North Korea meet the objective constituent elements of Article 6(2) of the National Security Act, the above provision shall also be interpreted to apply only where the act of diving and escape satisfies the objective constituent elements of Article 6(2) of the National Security Act, so that it can be reasonably regulated, the above provision shall apply only to cases where there is a clear risk that the act of diving and escape may harm the national existence and security or democratic fundamental order (see, e.g., Constitutional Court Order 97HunBa

(2) In this legal principle, the above escape from the territory of an anti-government organization on July 13, 1994 was taken place on July 13, 199, by the invitation of the "National Committee of North Korea" after the death of North Korea Kim Il-sung, and the defendant entered the Republic of Korea on July 13, 1994 and entered the Republic of Korea on July 14, 1994, and he met or prescribed Kim Il-sung at a gold fishery doctor where the body of Kim Il-sung was removed on July 14, 1994. On July 19, 197, the defendant was present at the Kim Il-sung funeral funeral held at the above gold fishery doctor's meeting on July 19, 200, and the defendant participated in the same day in the Kim Il-yang Kim Il Kim Il Kim Jong-sungp, which was held in the same day, and there is no other specific evidence to acknowledge that the defendant was an anti-government organization's existence or an anti-government organization for other purposes.

(3) Ultimately, this part of the facts charged is deemed not guilty on the ground that there is no proof of the crime. Accordingly, the defendant's assertion about this is with merit.

4. Judgment on the facts charged under paragraph (3)

A. Summary of the facts charged

The summary of this part of the facts charged is as follows: (a) in order for the defendant to receive the order of North Korea from February 28, 1995 to March 22, 2003, the defendant entered South Korea over 13 times to discuss the issue of holding the unification academic conference in which the North Korean authorities and other foreign scholars attend, or participate in the above unification academic conference held in peace; and (b) in the North Korean representative of the interest division in the presence of the North Korean on July 7, 1997, the defendant went to an area under the control of the anti-government organization, and escape from the area under the control of the anti-government organization, and meet with the members of the anti-government organization.

B. Acknowledgement of facts

In addition to the argument that there was no "the purpose of accepting orders or negotiating the performance of the purpose" as to this part of the facts charged, the Defendant entered North Korea upon the invitation of North Korea, and discussed the issue of holding the unification academic conference with the North Korean authority, enter the North Korean representative body for the benefit of North Korea to recognize the fact that the defendant attended the ceremony above, and is supported by relevant evidence. Thus, all objective facts can be recognized.

C. Regarding special escape and meeting related to the Uniform Science Conference

(1) As seen earlier, comprehensively taking account of the background and progress background of each of the above unification academic conferences and the defendant's actions or roles during the process, the holding of each of the above unification academic conferences can be evaluated as having contributed to the promotion of private exchange and the creation of a settlement atmosphere for peaceful unification between South and North Korea, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. However, the special escape crime under Article 6 (2) of the National Security Act can be applied only when the act is clearly dangerous to the national existence and security or democratic fundamental order. This legal principle also applies to the crime of meeting under Article 8 (1) of the same Act. Accordingly, the defendant's entry in North Korea to discuss the issue of holding each of the above unification academic councils or directly participating in each of the above unification academic councils constitutes each of the above special escape crimes and crimes.

(2) Therefore, the decision of the court below that acquitted the facts charged is just, and the prosecutor's appeal on this part is without merit.

C. As to the special escape and meeting relating to the Geunsung Death three cycle transplant

(1) Article 3 of the Constitution stipulates that the territory of the Republic of Korea shall be the Korean Peninsula and its annexed islands, and North Korea also belongs to the territory of the Republic of Korea. However, North Korea cannot be deemed to fall under the territory of the Republic of Korea even if North Korea is the representative of North Korea residing in accordance with a treaty or agreement with a foreign country. Therefore, the defendant's entry into the North Korean representative of North Korean stationed in Vietnam in order to attend the Kim Il-sung ceremony at the defendant's home located in Germany in Vietnam does not constitute an offense committed in the territory of the Republic of Korea. The same applies to the defendant's participation in the above North Korean representative of North Korea, who is a member of anti-government organizations, within the above North Korean representative division of North Korea. The defendant's participation in the above Kim Il-sung ceremony was first directed in North Korea, within the territory of the Republic of Korea, and the defendant's intent to carry out such order was final and reached North Korea. In fact, the defendant's entry in this part of the charges against foreigners falling under this part of the charges in Germany should be treated as an overseas crime.

(2) In addition, Article 6 of the National Security Act provides that the act of escape to an area under the control of an anti-government organization shall be punished, and the above provision shall not be deemed a special provision on the general provisions of the Criminal Act concerning a foreigner's overseas crime, and there is no evidence to recognize that the defendant acquired German nationality with the aim of evading the application of the law by concerns that the defendant would be punished under the National Security Act. In addition, the defendant's joining the North Korean Joseon Labor Party as a member of the North Korean Labor Party cannot be deemed as acquiring the North Korean nationality immediately after the defendant joined the North Korean Labor Party. Accordingly,

(3) According to the records, the North Korean mission was established as a provisional measure to establish a new diplomatic relationship with the Germany, which was established in the East Germany as of October 3, 1990, with the German integration, and the diplomatic relationship between the North Korean Embassy and the North Germany was terminated on the basis of the extinguishment of the diplomatic relationship between the East Germany and the North Germany as of October 3, 1990, and on March 2001, it can be known that the South Korean mission performed its functions as a diplomatic mission dealing with visa issuance, trade promotion, and investment promotion, etc., at the same time until the school between Germany and the North Germany is established. Accordingly, the North Korean mission cannot be deemed as a foreign legal zone. Accordingly, the prosecutor's assertion of this part of the premise that the extension of the territory of the North Korean territory is without merit.

5. Judgment on the facts charged under paragraph (4)

A. Summary of the facts charged

이 부분 공소사실의 요지는, 피고인이 독일 베를린에 있는 피고인의 집에서 베를린 주재 북한이익대표부를 통하여 북한의 김정일에게 ① 1996. 12. 일자불상경 이른바 ‘설 명절 축하편지를’, ② 1997. 2. 일자불상경 이른바 ‘경애하는 장군님 탄생 55돐(1997. 2. 16.) 축하편지’를, ③ 1997. 4. 일자불상경 이른바 ‘위대한 수령님 탄생 85돐(1997. 4. 15.) 축하편지’를 각 발송하여 국가의 존립·안전이나 자유민주적 기본질서를 위태롭게 한다는 정을 알면서 반국가단체의 구성원과 연락하였다는 것이다.

B. Acknowledgement of facts

Although it is well known at any time, the defendant argued that he sent a formal festival once in the future of the Kim Jong-il, the defendant sent a letter of explanation to Kim Jong-Un through the North Korean representative book of the Republic of Korea stationed in Vietnam for three times as stated in this part of the facts charged, according to each of the "General Report on Business of the first half-year Business (Investigation Records No. 6577)" and "4-month Business Plan (Investigation Records No. 6533)" in the report filed in the records.

C. Whether jurisdiction exists

Article 2 of the Criminal Act applies to foreigners who have committed crimes in the territory of the Republic of Korea (Article 2 of the Criminal Act). This includes not only the act of practice but also the case where the result occurred in the territory of the Republic of Korea, and Article 8 of the National Security Act covers all the process of exchanging intent with the other party. Thus, even if the defendant sent letter in Germany to a foreigner, so long as the other party Kim Jong-il is delivered in North Korea, which is the territory of the Republic of Korea, the defendant shall be deemed to have committed crimes in the territory of the Republic of Korea. Therefore, this part of the defendant's assertion is without merit, since the defendant has jurisdiction over this part of the crime

D. Whether there is a clear risk that may harm the existence and security of the State or democratic fundamental order

(1) The defendant sent an explanation letter to Kim Jong-il, Kim Il-Un, Kim Il-Un, merely an ordinary act. Thus, even if the other party to the delivery was Kim Jong-Un, an anti-government organization, the delivery of the letter itself does not constitute a case where there is a clear risk that the defendant would directly harm the national existence and security or democratic fundamental order. Therefore, the facts charged in this part constitute a case where there is no proof of the crime, and thus, the defendant's assertion pointing this out is with merit.

(2) As to this, the prosecutor argued that North Korea reported the fact through a labor newspaper, and used it as a means of propaganda and praiseing the North Korean regime, which is the Monomenity system of Kim Il-il and Kim Jong-il, and that the Defendant sent each of the above forms of letters despite having been well aware that she would be used as the above propaganda tool, and thus, it constitutes a case where there is a clear danger that the State’s existence and security or free democratic fundamental order might be harmed. However, this is not reasonable because North Korea, which is a third party, does not own the offender’s intent or act, may result in a different evaluation depending on how North Korea uses the act.

6. Judgment on the facts charged under paragraph (5)

A. Summary of the facts charged

The summary of this part of the facts charged is that the defendant joined the North Korean Joseon Labor Association and was appointed as a candidate for a political state, and the victim non-indicted 1 published this fact through the book "the truth and falsity of North Korea" around June 1998, and he argued that the above non-indicted 1 caused damage to the defendant's honor by publishing the above facts to the Seoul Seoul District Court on October 13 of the same year, and filed a damages lawsuit (98Gahap86702) claiming the payment of consolation money of KRW 100 million against the above non-indicted 1, thereby deceiving the above court and receiving the above money from the above non-indicted 1. However, on August 23, 2001, the plaintiff was sentenced to a judgment against the plaintiff on August 23, 2001.

B. Whether a deceptive act exists

(1) According to each of the records of the Seoul District Court case No. 98Gahap86702 (No. 18, title 51-58 of the Investigation Records) and the part related to the facts charged (No. 62 of the Investigation Records No. 18, title 62 of the part related to the facts charged of this part of the “North Korea’s truth and falsity” written by Nonindicted Party 1, the record attached to the record, stating that the above Nonindicted Party 1 published false facts and damaged his reputation, the part stating that the Defendant “North Korea rulingr was not a candidate for a political bureau under the name of “○○○○○,” and that “the North Korea rulingr was elected as a candidate for a political bureau and reported substantially to newspapers with Kim Il-il meeting,” and the Defendant did not have joined the fact that he was not a candidate for a political bureau of the North Korea Labor Party, and that he was not a party to the North Korea Joseon Labor Party, and that he was not using the name “○○○○○○○.” through a complaint.

(2) As seen earlier, there is no sufficient evidence to acknowledge that the defendant is a candidate for the political party of the North Korean political party, so this part of the argument is without deceiving the court. However, as long as the defendant actually joined the North Korean Joseon Labor Party around September 1973, the defendant has been doing various activities for North Korea while maintaining contact with North Korea for a long time thereafter, and the defendant was using the above provisional name on July 19, 1994, such as attending the Kim Il-sung funeral ceremony under the name of "○○○○" on July 19, 1994, it is recognized by the court below, so the defendant partly deceiving the court in this point. As alleged by the defendant, it is important issue whether the defendant is a candidate for a political party, and as long as the defendant is not acknowledged as a candidate for a political party, this part of the argument by the defendant is not reasonable.

(c)the existence of the will to commit the crime of defraudation or to obtain the illegal obtaining;

The elements constituting such internal deliberation intent cannot be determined by comprehensively taking account of the objective circumstances at the time of the crime. As long as it is recognized that the defendant filed a lawsuit against the above non-indicted 1 seeking compensation of KRW 100 million by claiming that his reputation was damaged by publication of false facts as above, it is sufficient to recognize the defendant's criminal intent or intent of unlawful acquisition. This part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

III. Conclusion

Therefore, since the prosecutor's appeal as to the acquittal portion of the judgment below is without merit, it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. Among the conviction portion of the judgment below, the defendant's appeal as to Paragraph (1) (the point of escape to the area of anti-government organization as of July 13, 1994), Paragraph (f) (the point of escape to the area of anti-government organization as of July 13, 1994), and Paragraph (4) (the point of contact with each member of anti-government organization which has more than three times) is justified, the entire conviction portion of the judgment below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act.

The defendant, who was born in Japan, returned to the Republic of Korea after the 8.15 Seah and graduated from the Department of the philosophy of the Seoul National University on February 15, 1967, and studying in Germany on July 15, 1972, acquired philosophal degree in the Franc University on June 1972, and Yebol University on January 18, 1982, acquired German nationality on August 18, 1993, was employed as a professor of the Republic of Korea at the Mucol University located in Vietnam from August 194, 1994 to be employed as a professor of the Republic of Korea at the Gucol University on March 3, 1998;

1. With knowledge that North Korea’s vacant organization is an anti-government organization that has been unlawfully organized for the purpose of joining the Government and changing the State and is punished for escape to an area governed by such anti-government organization;

A. On March 191, 191, in the Defendant’s house located in German War, from the Institute of Social Research and Human Resources in North Korea, “I want to invite NNN to the Republic of Korea to participate in academic studies and unification campaigns overseas. We want to discuss NNNNN in the subject of philosophy and modern philosophy. The time of visit is good at any time according to the convenience of NNNN, but it will be possible to visit during the five months of this year by receiving a letter of invitation stating “I will attend a philosophical debate” held in North Korea, and will enter North Korea on May 10, 191, using aviation in Germany, and stay in the first place of a philosophical philosophical philosophical philosophical philosophical philosophical philos.”

○ On May 13, 199, visit the People’s Economic College to the People’s Economic College and received meetings from North Korean Head of the Education of North Korea and the president of the above University, and hold academic conferences with faculty members and scholars of the above University;

○ On May 17 of the same year, the above Institute of Social Research attended a academic debate under the bill of “the development of philosophical philosophy and the task of modern philosophy,” which was held in the presence of 20 scholars of North Korea at the above Institute of Social Research, and listens to the lectures of philosophy from scholars of the subject philosophy of North Korea;

From May 17 of the same year to May 18 of the same year, at the guidance of scholars belonging to the above Institute of Social Research, tourism to the place of Mayang-si, Kim Il-sung, Kim Il-sung, Kim Il-sung, who is a student of the above Institute of Social Research, and visiting Dok-si, who visited Dok-si, the chairman of the Steering and Unification Committee under the Department of Labor of the United Kingdom of Labor, as well as Nonindicted 44 (Death on May 11, 1991), who is a member of the political party of the previous Department of Labor, impliedly in front of the tomb;

On May 20, 201 of the same year, the above philosophical doctoral doctoral doctor and scholars in the field of social science who are the mother of the above philosophical philosophical philosophical philosophical philosical philosical philosical philosical philossical philosical philosical philosical

On May 24, 201 of the same year, when visiting Kim Il-sung, located in the Simsan, in the name of the leader, in a single interview for about three hours, with the guidance of the leader, he visited Kim Il-sung, located in the Simsan, and visited him for about three hours, and thereafter, "it is better for members of the Republic of Korea who are sent to the Republic of Korea to do so more than one professor?" and "I will be better for members of the Republic of Korea to go against North Korea by using a vacation period in the future, as we know about the capitalism?" Then, he dialogues on the economic issues after unification, such as Germany's socialist state system and North Korea system, the difference between North and South Korea's UN accession and U.S. system, the nuclear file and North Korea's non-nuclearization of the Korean Peninsula, etc., and gives Kim Il-il and commemorative photography.

○○ immediately following the date, Non-Indicted 2, the Head of the Uniform Cable Department of Labor at the time, Non-Indicted 1, who was the Director of the International Department of Labor and the Director of the Department of Civil Aviation at the time of the time, requested that Non-Indicted 1, who was the Director of the Department of Civil Aviation and the Director of the Department of Civil Aviation, “A professor appears to have a big influence in South Korea, especially since he had been engaged in the organization project in Germany for a multi-year period in Germany, sent professors according to Germany,” and “A professor’s name was read as “○○○○” in the future, and “A professor’s name was read as “a professor’s name was read as a ○○○○.” Since there was no fluite under the Department of Civil Aviation, there was no fluite, so the Department of Civil Affairs, who was instructed by Non-Indicted 1, would request education from the Department of Private Research and the Director of the Institute of Social Research and Research, the Director of Non-Indicted 7, and the subject of Education.

On May 29, 201 of the same year, the United States dollars 2,00 has been paid to the German government on May 30 of the same year, after attending the Dok, which was held in the Seocho-gu At the Seocho-gu Seocho in Pyeongyang, which was held on September 29, 200, and hearing from the person in charge of the Department of the Uniform Electric Cable to the effect that "I am with a great outcome in the study of the consignors", and receiving approximately 2,000 U.S. dollars from the person in charge of the Department of the Uniform Electric Cable, for travel expenses, from

B. When Non-Indicted 38 et al. (Korean Institute of Science and Technology) established by Non-Indicted 38 et al. after receiving books necessary for research on the principal ideology from North Korea was closed in around 1987, the Korean Institute of Science and Technology (Korean Institute of Research) received operating funds from North Korea and tried to resume the said Institute, and delivered the desire to join North Korea through the North Korean representative body in Vietnam, and went to North Korea through the North Korean representative body in Vietnam, and stayed in North Korea for about one week in the same manner as the above paragraph (a) of the above above, and came to Korea on July 191, 191, and came to Korea for about one week from July 1, 191, it was promised that he would actively consider the above Institute's operation funds by requesting the said researcher to receive learning on the principal ideology from the above Non-Indicted 1, 7, 36, and 37, and receive approximately 1,000 U.S. dollars as travel expenses from the person who was under his name.

C. On July 192, 192, the first police officer of the above defendant's house prepared materials related to the socialist politics, economy, and philosophy of the subject requested by the first student at the time of the first visit from Non-Indicted 39 (the chief of the department of the department of the department of the department of the department of the department of the department of the department of the department of the department of the department of the department of the department of the society and the driving school). He received the invitation letter stating "I would like to prepare an opportunity for our experts to discuss if I visit at a convenient time during September or October 1992. I would like to prepare an opportunity to discuss with our experts. I would like to attend the "philosolosolosolosolosolosolosolosolosophical debate" in the manner as above (A) and stayed in North Korea for about one week from September 1992, after entering the North Korea in the manner as described in the above paragraph (A). After receiving approximately 1,000 U.S. dollars as travel expenses.

D. On March 19, 193, upon receipt of an order from North Korea to attend a debate on the subject ideology, etc., he entered North Korea on March 19, 1993 in the same manner as the above paragraph (a) and stays in the guard room in the name of the non-indicted 1, 7, and 36, etc. on May 1, 1991, at the time of entrance into North Korea on March 23, 191, he was received learning in the form of a debate on the subject ideology of Kim Il-sung by meeting with the executives of the labor party, such as the non-indicted 1, 7, and 36, etc. and North Korean scholars on March 25, 1993, and received approximately 1,00 U.S. dollars as travel expenses from a person who has not been paid his name, and he was returned to Germany on March 26, 1993 by using aviation.

E. On February 194, 1994, the first vice-chairman of the Institute of Social Sciences presented consideration to the academic activities through several sides of the NJE 40 from the first vice-chairman of the Institute of Social Science and Technology in North Korea. He received material from experts related to his works and provided a bad will to visit the early country for the purpose of exchanging information, and he is preparing for this. He receives a letter of invitation stating, “The visit from NNNN to the early country will be greater than during March 1994) in North Korea by taking advantage of the above paragraph (a) on March 12, 1994, and staying in the first vice-chairman of the Institute of Social Science and Technology in the name of the North Korea, in which he had consulted on March 12, 1994, and then requested that the defendant, who is the person in charge of the labor of NNNNG, participate in the above international seminars to 30,195, 195, 305, 195.

To escape to an area under the control of an anti-government organization in order to receive an order or to consult with an accomplishment of purpose by a North Korean government organization which is an anti-government organization;

2. On June 1998, the victim non-indicted 1 published and distributed a book stating "the truth and falsity in North Korea" stating that "the victim non-indicted 1 was a professor at the rate of transmission, who is well aware of it. North Korean ruling officers are present in South and North Korea, for the purpose of attracting students in South and North Korea in Germany, and for the purpose of using them for various other purposes, they are elected as candidates for a political country and reports pictures meeting Kim Il-il to newspapers." The defendant was enrolled in the Joseon Labor Party on September 1973, and the defendant has been living in various activities for North Korea while maintaining contact with North Korea and his mother for a long time. On July 19, 1994, the above provisional name was used, such as "○○○○○" in the name of a funeral ceremony, etc., and immediately after the death of the Kim Il-il, the above name was made up to the list of the members of the National Committee 2003 among the members of the National Committee.

On October 13, 1998, the Seoul District Court filed a lawsuit claiming compensation for damages against the above non-indicted 1 as "the plaintiff's withholding rate did not use the provisional name "○○○", and even though the non-indicted 1 did not have joined the North Korean labor party, he published a book stating the above false facts and damaged the plaintiff's reputation. In this case, the defendant did not intend to receive the above money by deceiving the above court after receiving the above judgment from the above court on August 23, 2001, the defendant issued the book with the above false facts and damaged the plaintiff's reputation. The defendant paid 10 million won per annum from July 20, 1998 to the sentencing date of the above case, and 25 percent per annum per annum from the next day until the full payment is made." However, the defendant did not have attempted to receive the above money from the above court on August 23, 201.

Facts No. 1 of the ruling

1. Partial statement in the original judgment and the trial court of the defendant;

1. The legal statement of Nonindicted 1’s witness at the lower court

1. Statement of verification of December 26, 2003 by the court of the original instance

1. Some of the suspect examinations of the accused prepared by the public prosecutor: The first, second, five, 16, and 17 times;

1. A copy of each protocol of interrogation of Nonindicted 38 prepared by the prosecutor

1. Each written statement of Nonindicted 41 and 1 prepared by the prosecutor

1. Each letter of invitation (in relation to investigative records, No. 414, 416, 417 pages) corresponding thereto;

1. Statement on North Korea (in relation to investigative records, No. 18, 415 pages) corresponding thereto;

1. Each labor newspaper (Evidence 3 through 6) dated May 18, 191, May 20, 1991, May 21, 1991, May 21, 1991, and May 25, 1991;

1. A video tape (No. 2) dated May 24, 1991;

Comprehensively,

Facts No. 2 of the ruling

1. Partial statement in the original judgment and the trial court of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of Non-Indicted 6 and 1 of the witness of the court below

1. Each legal statement of Nonindicted 9 and 42 by the witness of the court below

1. Each of the verification records dated December 26, 2003 and February 27, 2004 by the court of the original instance

1. Each protocol of examination of the accused of preparation of the public prosecutor: On 1, 2, 3, 16, 17, and 18 19 times;

1. Statement of Nonindicted 1 prepared by the prosecutor

1. Each statement made on July 3, 2000 against Nonindicted 1 prepared by the judicial police officer, and September 28, 2003, respectively.

1. Investigation report prepared by a judicial police officer (the identification of the chief commissioner, and the pages of trial records No. 2314-2332);

1. Nonindicted Party 1’s examination protocol (No. 18, No. 254 of the investigation record)

1. A copy of the reply to the inquiry of fact made on February 24, 2000 by the Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade (No. 18 title 308 of the Investigation Records), reply to the request for the inquiry of fact made on November 21, 2000 by the Director of the National Intelligence Service (No. 19 title 733 of the Investigation Records), and notification of the reply data to the inquiry made on January 31, 2001 (No. 19 title 823 of the Investigation Records)

1. Statement on North Korea (Investigative Records No. 18, 415 pages);

1. A complaint in the case of Seoul District Court 98Gahap86702 (Investigative Records No. 18, 51-58);

1. A copy of the judgment (Seoul District Court 98Gahap86702, No. 345-355 pages of investigation records);

1. 3.5 "SF.BAK" and "PO.BAK' (PO.BAK)" in the 3.5-person computer diskettes 2 (No. 1) and the Gyeongbuk-gu's 12-2, a printed output;

1. A video tape (No. 2) dated May 24, 1991 and a video tape (No. 23) dated July 14, 1994;

1. Each labor newspaper (Evidence 3 through 6, 10 through 12) dated May 18, 1991, May 20, 1991, May 21, 1991, May 25, 1991, May 25, 1991, July 9, 194, 26, February 25, 1995, and September 25, 1996;

As a whole, each of them can be recognized:

All facts in the ruling are proven.

1. Applicable provisions of Acts and select of punishments for criminal facts;

(a) The point of each special escape as indicated in the judgment: Article 6 (2) of the National Security Act.

(b) An attempted fraud: Articles 352 and 347(1) of the Criminal Act.

2. Aggravation of concurrent crimes;

Article 37 (former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act [Aggravation of concurrent crimes with the punishment provided for in the National Security Act of May 10, 191, which is the largest sentence of the punishment and the punishment for the crime committed]

3. Discretionary mitigation;

Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances in the grounds for sentencing)

4. Calculation of days of detention;

Article 57 of the Criminal Act

5. Suspension of execution;

Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (see the following Reasons for Sentencing):

1. Summary of criminal liability of the defendant;

As above, the Defendant was found guilty on September 1973, while joining and leaving in North Korea for a long time since he had been staying in contact with North Korea on five occasions from May 191 to March 194, 191, and had contacted North Korea's high-ranking authorities in charge of South Korea including Kim Il-il and had engaged in various activities for North Korea. In recent years, the Defendant committed a lawsuit against the non-indicted 1 who disclosed his pro-North Korea activities against him. Such crimes are likely to pose a substantial risk of harm to the nation's existence and security or democratic fundamental order, which is the legal interest protected by the National Security Act. Furthermore, considering the Defendant's various kinds of ex officio activities through North Korea and the security situation of our society, the possibility of criticism is higher.

Until recent years, the Defendant externally concealed the above fact of joining the Joseon Labor Party and the fact of smuggling or pro-North Korea's pro-North Korea's pro-North Korea's pro-North Korea's pro-North Korea's pro-North Korea behavior as if he were neutrally pursuing the peaceful unification of the fatherland from a neutral standpoint. The Defendant's attitude is nothing more than deceiving many people who have in good faith supported the Defendant. It is necessary for the Defendant to visit North Korea from a faculty point of view, not just conduct academic activities, but rather conduct anti-state activities detrimental to the security of our country by using his academic status. The Defendant merely goes beyond the boundary of our positive law and order based on the value of free democracy that should not go beyond the boundary of the two Koreas, rather than go beyond the boundary of the two Koreas. The Defendant must be punished for a strict reprimanding the Defendant.

2. Reasons why such circumstances may be considered; and

On the other hand, however, there are grounds for considering the following circumstances in the determination of the sentence against the defendant.

First of all, the defendant's authority as a student or a democratization movement is deemed to have suffered unexpected damage due to the fact that the defendant joined the Joseon Labor Party as above, and the remaining shares are considered to have been entrusted to the sound discussions and criticism of the general public including our academic circles. In addition, despite some negative impacts on the research of the North Korean society created by the defendant between where the defendant had the intention of doing so, new approaches were presented in recognizing the North Korean society evenly, and as recognized above, the unification academic conference organized by the defendant for six times can be deemed to have contributed significantly to the promotion of the South and North Korean understanding. The defendant has already been aware of the fact that the defendant had a peaceful movement from around 1996, and it appears that the defendant had a view of meeting on North Korea in the future, and this appears to have not given any particular friendship to the defendant, but made efforts to confirm the fact that the defendant had a peaceful desire to return to Korea during the course of this case's unification, and the fact that the defendant had a right to arrest from North Korea during the course of this case's unification.

Next, for more than 10 years after the Defendant’s act of smuggling in this case, the tension between South and North Korea is common sense, and the tension between South and North Korea has been mitigated, and further, it is developing as the era of reconciliation and the time of win-win cooperation to build mutual trust and promote mutual understanding through various exchanges and cooperation across various areas, such as culture, sports, science, economy, etc.. The North Korea is recognized as a partner of dialogue and cooperation for the peaceful unification of the South and North Korea, not the other party to the war. Therefore, even though North Korea still has been recognized as a partner of dialogue and cooperation for the peaceful unification of the South and North Korea, the North Korea still has a very threat to the existence and security of our country, but at least in applying the National Security Act, it has become very difficult to uniformly apply the tension of North Korea to all cases like North Korea.

Finally, the collapse of So-called So-called So-called So-called the socialist system in the early 1990s led to the era of debrising ideology, and the time of international-state-free competition. The unification to us living in the only divided countries in this base is a blue and historical mission for survival, which can be achieved by starting up the ideology of our nation and making public announcement of the ideology. However, this case cannot be said to seriously concern the present reality in which the debate of timely unreasonable ideology has led to the dialogue between South and North Korea, and caused internal conflicts in our society. While declaring a strict legal responsibility for Defendant’s act, it is desirable that our individual will prevent conflicts with our society, and contribute not only to the peaceful development of society and to the peaceful development of society as a means of controlling social integration and operation of society, but also to contribute to social integration and social integration.

3. Conclusion

In consideration of these circumstances, the defendant will be sentenced to the same punishment as the order.

1. Of the facts charged in the instant case, as to Paragraph (1) (a) and Paragraph (2) (f) (the escape from the territory of an anti-government organization as of July 13, 1994), and Paragraph (4) (a) (a contact point with each member of an anti-government organization having more than three times)

The summary of each part of the facts charged is the same as stated in the corresponding part of each of the above facts charged, which constitutes a case where there is no proof of facts constituting an offense as stated in the judgment on the grounds of each of the above grounds for appeal, and thus, the court acquitted each of the facts charged under the latter part of Article 32

2. As to Paragraph 5 (Attempted Fraud) of the facts charged in the instant case

The summary of this part of the facts charged is also the same as indicated in the above part of the facts charged, and among the facts charged that the defendant deceivings the court in relation to Non-Indicted 1's publication of false facts, as stated in the judgment on the grounds for appeal, the defendant is a candidate for the political party of the North Korean Joseon Labor Party, since there is no sufficient evidence to acknowledge it, at least in relation to this point, there is no fact of deceiving the court. Thus, this part of the facts charged should be pronounced not guilty, but as long as it is found that the defendant guilty of the attempted crime of lawsuit in relation

Judges Kim Yong-sung (Presiding Judge)