beta
Text
Defendants are not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the Defendants is publicly announced.
Reasons
1. Facts charged;
A. It is as shown in the attached indictment.
B. The legal provisions applied by the prosecutor to each act of the Defendants as stated in the attached facts charged are as follows.
1) Article 1 subparag. 2 of the former National Security Act (amended by Act No. 3318, Dec. 31, 1980; hereinafter the “former National Security Act”) as to the Defendants’ network E’ participation in the leading duty as to the commission of each insurrection, Article 5 subparag. 1 of the Anti-Public Law (amended by Act No. 3318, Dec. 31, 1980; hereinafter the “former National Security Act”) is Article 90 subparag. 2, Article 87 of the Criminal Act.
2) The legal provisions applicable to Defendant A are as follows: ① Articles 90(2), 87, and ② Article 1 subparag. 2 of the former National Security Act with respect to the conspiracy of insurrection; ③ Articles 90(1), 87, and 4(1) of the Criminal Act with respect to the conspiracy of insurrection, and Article 5(1) of the Anti-Public Act with respect to the fact that: (a) with respect to the conspiracy of insurrection, a person consisting of L, who is an organization of a counter-state, serves as an executive officer or a leading member; and (b) the fact that the act of conspiracy of insurrection constitutes an organization of counter-state, thereby benefitting the organization of counter-state.
3) The respective applicable legal provisions against Defendants B, C, and D are ① Article 1 subparag. 2 of the former National Security Act with respect to the performance of duties as an executive officer or leader as a person who forms a non-state organization, ② Articles 90 subparag. 1, 87, and 37 of the Criminal Act with respect to the conspiracy of insurrection, and Article 4 subparag. 1 and ④ Article 5 subparag. 1 of the Anti-Public Act with respect to the conduct of insurrection.
4) Article 3(1) of the Anti-Public Act regarding the joining of Defendants F as an anti-state organization, and Article 4(1) of the Anti-Public Act regarding the fact that the joining of Defendants F would benefit from an anti-state organization by praiseing the activities of anti-state organization.