All
| TITLE | 【Syllabus of Latest Opinion】 Supreme Court Decision 2019Do11015 Decided September 27, 2024 【Violation of the Act on Counter-Terrorism for the Protection of Citizens and Public Security】 [full Text] |
|---|---|
| Summary | |
| 【Main Issues and Holdings】 [1] Meaning of “instigating others to join a terrorist group” stipulated in Article 17(3) of the Act on Counter-Terrorism for the Protection of Citizens and Public Security Whether a person can be seen to have instigated others to join a terrorist group on the sole basis of an act of advocating or instructing certain political ideas or abstract principles related to terrorism or terrorist groups or an act of praising, encouraging, propagandizing, or following activities of terrorist groups (negative) Whether an act of propagandizing and instigating terrorism that has nothing to do with terrorist groups can be seen to correspond to an act of instigating others to join a terrorist group (negative) [2] Standard of determining whether any expression corresponds to an act of instigating others to join a terrorist group as referred to in Article 17(3) of the Act on Counter-Terrorism for the Protection of Citizens and Public Security and method of determining whether any expression posted on the social media platform corresponds to an act of instigating others to join a terrorist group, an act of propagandizing and instigating terrorism, or an act of praising, encouraging, propagandizing, or following activities of terrorist groups [3] Only where the content regarding an affiliation to a terrorist group or the intention to encourage others to join a terrorist group is explicitly or directly revealed, whether the specific contact information for expressing intent to join a terrorist group or the methods, means, and procedures to join a terrorist group were provided, or the provided information, etc. constitute a practical means of joining a terrorist group were clarified, whether it can be seen as an act of instigating others to join a terrorist group as referred to in Article 17(3) of the Act on Counter-Terrorism for the Protection of Citizens and Public Security (negative) [4] Whether the danger of inducing or increasing any resolve of those instigated to join a terrorist group should be recognized to correspond to an act of instigating others to join a terrorist group as referred to in Article 17(3) of the Act on Counter-Terrorism for the Protection of Citizens and Public Security (affirmative) and in such a case, when any resolution to join a terrorist group should arouse from among those instigated due to such instigation, as one of the elements required for the constitution of such act, or there must be a recognized likelihood that those instigated will proceed to take action to join the terrorist group, whether the danger of being instigated to join the terrorist group can be seen to exist (negative) [5] In a case where the criminal defendant who decided to instigate a large number of people to join IS in the manner of uploading posts praising the Islamic State (IS) and its affiliated terrorist groups through his or her Internet Facebook account operated by him or her and posting a link of a Telegram chat room in which those who turn in favor of IS after reading such messages can have one-on-one conversations with the members of IS, was charged for instigating many and unspecified persons to join IS in the way of uploading posts and videos praising the ideas of IS, a terrorist group designated by the United Nation, on Facebook and posting a link that can have direct conversations with unknown members of IS, the case holding that the lower court, which acquitted the criminal defendant of the charge of instigating others to join a terrorist group not guilty, erred and adversely affected the conclusion of judgment by misapprehending the legal doctrine | |
