Whether the violation of the Military Criminal Act Article 47 of the Military Criminal Act was an act of violation of the branch and branch and branch and branch of the Bosari (GP/GP).

"Justifiable order" under Article 47 of the Military Criminal Act refers to an order issued by the National Assembly, which is a legislative body, to the effect that it is delegated by the National Assembly to the above Article 47 of the Military Criminal Act in light of the principle of no punishment without the law and the unique nature of the authority to access the military, and, in essence, it refers to an order, which is a legislative matter, concerning the actual contents of punishment, and thus does not constitute a violation of the order under Article 47 of the Military Criminal Act, since the duties within the branch of the Bosa Group and the branch thereof (GP/GP) work within the Bosa Group constitute a violation of the order under Article 47 of the Military Criminal Act.

Article 47 of the Military Criminal Act

Supreme Court Decision 83Do362 delivered on February 28, 1984, Supreme Court Decision 84Do95 delivered on March 13, 1984

Defendant 1 and one other

Defendants

Attorney Kim Nam-jin, Justice Seo-jin, Counsel for the defendant

Supreme Court Decision 83Du417-1, 2 delivered on April 10, 1984

All appeals are dismissed.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

1. As to the grounds of appeal by Defendant 1’s defense counsel on the grounds of appeal

The gist of the grounds of appeal is that the court below failed to exhaust all necessary deliberations on the grounds of appeal and omitted its judgment. According to the records of the first instance court's decision that the amount of punishment against the defendant, defense counsel at the court below's attorney at the court below's office is unreasonable, the court below did not find any material to recognize that the amount of punishment is too inappropriate even if considering the circumstances asserted by the defendant in detail, even though considering the motive, means, results, age, character and conduct of the defendant, environment, circumstances after the crime, etc.

2. As to Defendant 1’s grounds of appeal

The so-called "justifiable Order" stipulated in Article 47 of the Military Criminal Act refers to an order which is a legislative body, which is an institution in charge of general authority, issued by the National Assembly as delegated by Article 47 of the Military Criminal Act in light of the principle of legality and the unique nature of the right to access to the military service, and, in essence, is an essential and concrete matter of punishment, which is a legislative matter, and issued by the National Assembly, which is an institution in charge of general authority. Thus, it does not constitute a violation of the general rules of conduct of military personnel. However, it is clear that the court below's order is an order for military operations such as the control of the military base working in the area where the military wire is located, and it is not a violation of the so-called order under Article 47 of the Military Criminal Act and its independent decision is not a violation of the rules of conduct of military personnel. Thus, it is not a violation of the rules of conduct or an independent decision of the court below, and it is not a violation of the rules of law.

2. As to the grounds of appeal by Defendant 2’s defense counsel Kim Nam-jin

According to the records of the case, the military prosecutor, who is the prosecution officer of this case, changed the indictment at the court below, and specified the order of the defendant in violation of the order as an wire order on September 8, 1983 concerning the prompt report when the hospital with no confirmation of the whereabouts of the subrogation in the 11st order, which is the direct superior official of the defendant, takes place. Thus, it cannot be deemed that the facts charged were not specified because the order was not revealed, and where a work hospital with no confirmation of its location was discovered due to the unique characteristics of the diaper (GOP) work in the area where the break-out wire is located, it is naturally anticipated that it is an accident for personnel security, such as hostile escape or escape from the back area, which is naturally anticipated, and thus, it can be promptly taken measures such as blocking escape which is difficult to cope with as a large-scale medical force, and therefore, it cannot be accepted as a theory of independent opinion, and it cannot be accepted, and there is no violation of law as to the defendant's order as to this purport.

4. Therefore, since all appeals are without merit, they are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Lee Il-young (Presiding Justice)