"Justifiable order" under Article 47 of the Military Criminal Law refers to a case where the legislative body, which is an institution in charge of the common rights, is important in the common action delegated by the National Assembly as a legislative body, with regard to the specific matters in the body of body, and is, in essence, about the matters that fall under the actual requirements of punishment, which are legislative matters.

The term "reasonable order" in this article is the case of the main body that is the legislative body that is a legislative body that is in charge of the common power refers to a specific matter that is important and concrete in terms of the common power power delegated by the National Assembly as a group and is essentially related to the actual contents of punishment, which is a legislative matter.

Article 47 of the Military Criminal Act

Supreme Court Decision 68Do1846 Decided February 18, 1969

Defendant

The Military Control Department of the first instance, the High Military Control Department of the second instance, and the High Military Court of the second instance, the High Military Court Decision 68No40 delivered on December 18, 1968

The original judgment shall be reversed, and

The case shall be remanded to the Maritime Affairs Council of the High Military Court.

As to the fact that the defendant, which was the fact in the judgment of the first instance court maintained by the original judgment, was in violation of the Military Service Rule by gathering false facts about the accidents in the above 87 boxes from Non-Party 1 working in the same office to Non-Party 1 working in the planning and office for the distribution of the Navy on July 1, 1968, and by spreading to Non-Party 2 the same contents as that he distributed to Non-Party 1 (which means that the dispatch or dispatch would be limited to one by the land distribution of the North Dop) and spreading to Non-Party 2 at around 09:30, the defendant violated the order by spreading to Non-Party 1 the same office;

According to the court's decision on the constitutionality of Article 47 of the Military Criminal Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 68Do1846, Feb. 18, 1969), a "justifiable order" of the same group refers to an order in essence, which is a legislative matter, issued by the National Assembly, which is a legislative body in charge of the right to access, concerning matters falling under the substantial contents of punishment, which is a legislative matter, even though it is important and important in the water administration action delegated by the National Assembly as a legislative body, which is delegated by the legislative body. Thus, the matters under each subparagraph of Article 27 of the Military Service Rule stated in the above decision are merely stipulated in the general rules of the military's daily activities, and it is not recognized that the contents of the order were necessary and important matters in light of the above precedents, which are the contents of the order. Thus, if the original judgment was a "justifiable order" under Article 47 of the Military Criminal Act, and it is unlawful in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the above defendant's acts under the above Article.

Therefore, the court below erred by erroneously interpreting the legitimate order under Article 47 of the Military Criminal Act and thereby finding the defendant guilty. Thus, the court below's judgment cannot escape from reversal in this point.

Therefore, it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all the judges who participated in accordance with Articles 436, 438, and 439(2) of the Military Court Act.

The judges of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge) Dog-dong and Kim Jong-dong Dog-dong and Kim Jong-dong Dog-Jakngng, Kim Jong-gu, Kim Young-gu, Hong-han, Kim Young-han, Kim Jong-young, Kim Jong-young, Kim Jong-young