The judgment below

The part against the defendant shall be reversed.

The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant.

1. The following facts are acknowledged according to the final records of the judgment subject to review.

A. On September 7, 1976, the Seoul District Court Incheon Branch found the Defendant guilty of the charge of violating the Presidential Emergency Decree (hereinafter “Emergency Decree No. 9”) for the protection of national safety and public order, and sentenced the judgment below that imposed on the Defendant for eight years, suspension of qualifications, eight years, etc.

B. The Defendant and the Prosecutor appealed against the lower judgment, and this Court reversed the part of the lower judgment against the Defendant on February 2, 1977, and sentenced the Defendant to a judgment subject to a retrial that is subject to five years imprisonment and suspension of qualifications for five years, etc.

(c)

Although the defendant appealed again, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal on April 26, 1977, which became final and conclusive.

(d)

On November 2, 2017, a prosecutor filed a request for retrial of this case, and this court rendered a decision to commence retrial on November 30, 2017 on the ground that the part against the defendant among the decisions subject to retrial had been subject to further review under Article 420 subparag. 5 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

After that, there was no legitimate filing of a complaint within the appeal period, the decision of the retrial was finalized as it is.

2. Summary of reasons for appeal;

A. The Defendant did not commit a crime acknowledged by the lower court, and the sentence (eight years of imprisonment, suspension of qualifications, etc.) imposed by the lower court against the Defendant is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below against the defendant is too unfortunate and unfair.

3. The statutes applicable to criminal facts in a case where an ex officio review of judgment has commenced are the statutes at the time of the judgment of retrial.

Therefore, if the law at the time of the judgment subject to retrial changed, the court shall apply the law at the time of the judgment for retrial to the crime, and if it was abolished, it shall apply Article 326 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act to the judgment for acquittal.

However, the law on punishment was abolished at the time of new judgment.