[1] Whether an appellate court's judgment dismissing an appeal by the defendant on the sole ground of unfair sentencing can be deemed as the grounds of appeal for misapprehension of legal principles or misconception of facts (negative)

[2] Whether Article 250 (1) of the Act on the Election of Public Officials and the Prevention of Election Illegal Acts, which provides that a person who publishes or makes another person publish or makes another person publish an academic background other than the regular academic background recognized by the Elementary and Secondary Education Act and the Higher Education Act, shall be punished (negative)

[1] In a case where an appeal against the judgment of the first instance was dismissed on the sole ground of unfair sentencing as a ground for appeal, the appellate court's judgment may not be deemed as the ground for appeal that there was an error of misapprehension of legal principles or mistake

[2] In light of the relevant provisions of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act and the Higher Education Act (the Elementary and Secondary Education Act provides for the types of schools under Article 2, the classification of national, public, and private schools under Article 3, the establishment of schools under Article 4, etc.), the concept of "regular academic background recognized by the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, and the Higher Education Act" is clear in interpretation. Thus, the concept of "regular academic background recognized by the Elementary and Secondary Education Act" is clear in interpretation. Thus, the provision of Article 250 (1) of the Act on the Election of Public Officials and the Prevention of Unlawful Election, which provides for the right to pursue happiness, Article 10 (1) of the Constitution and Article 15 of the Higher Education Act prohibiting the publication of false academic background recognized by the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, other than regular academic background recognized by the Elementary and Secondary Education Act and the Higher Education Act, shall not be deemed to violate the principle of no punishment without law, and in light of the above, the purpose of the provision is prohibiting the publication of false facts affecting the fairness of elections.

[1] Article 383 of the Criminal Procedure Act / [2] Article 250 (1) of the Act on the Election of Public Officials and the Prevention of Unlawful Election, Articles 10, 11, 12, 15, and 25 of the Constitution

[1] Supreme Court Decision 94Do2134 delivered on February 3, 1995 (Gong1995Sang, 1195) Supreme Court Decision 96Do1212 delivered on October 11, 1996 (Gong1996Ha, 3370) decided November 8, 1996 (Gong196Ha, 3644)

Defendant

Defendant

Attorneys Kim Jong-sik et al.

Seoul High Court Decision 98No2431 delivered on October 27, 1998

The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal by the defendant and his defense counsel are also examined.

1. According to the records, the defendant appealed the judgment of the court of first instance only on the ground of unfair sentencing as the grounds for appeal, and in such a case, the defendant cannot be deemed as the grounds for appeal that there was an error of misunderstanding of legal principles or misunderstanding of facts against the judgment of the court of first instance (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 96Do2076, Nov. 8, 1996; 94Do2134, Feb. 3, 1995); further, in light of the records, the evidence prepared by the judgment of the court of first instance maintained by the court of first instance, the defendant can sufficiently recognize the crime of publishing false facts due to academic records other than the regular academic background under Article 250 (1) of the Act on the Election of Public Officials and the Prevention of Unlawful Election (hereinafter "Public Official Election Act"), and there is no error of law in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the crime of publication of false facts, etc. due to

2. Meanwhile, in light of the relevant provisions of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act and the Higher Education Act (as the Elementary and Secondary Education Act provides for the types of schools under Article 2, the classification of national, public and private schools under Article 3, the establishment of schools under Article 4, etc.), the concept of "regular academic background recognized by the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, and the Higher Education Act" is clear in its interpretation. Thus, the concept of "regular academic background recognized by the Elementary and Secondary Education Act" is clear in interpretation. Thus, in cases where "a person publishes any academic background other than the regular academic background recognized by the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, and the Higher Education Act" and "a person who publishes or makes another person publish any false academic background other than the regular academic background recognized by the Elementary and Secondary Education Act," and Article 250 (1) of the Public Official Election Act, which prohibits the publication of false facts affecting the fair judgment of the electors, and thus, it cannot be deemed as violating the principle of no punishment without the law.

3. Therefore, the defendant's appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Cho Chang-hoon (Presiding Justice)