• 
• 

    5.18이 민주화운동이라는 것, 규명된 바 없다

 

대법원 판결도 5.18 진상 규명 안 했다. 정치인들의 주장에 따라 아무런 근거 없이 민주화라고 “인정”하고 이를 잣대로 전두환을 민주화 탄압자로 처벌한 것이다. 이는 범법행위다

 

5.18은 역사다. 역사는 연구에 의해 기록된다. 5.18연구를 사법부가 하는 법은 없다. 역사연구는 학문의 영역이지 재판의 영역이 아니다. 1997.7.14. 대법원 판결은 전두환을 정치적으로 재판하여 그를 내란죄로 처벌한 문서다. 전두환이 내란죄로 처벌받은 것 하고 5.18에 북한군이 개입한 것 하고는 사돈의 판촌관계도 없다. 그런데 판사들은 “5.18이 대법원에서 민주화운동으로 판단됐다”고 주장하면서 연구행위를 범죄로 규정한다. 판사들의 머리가 빈 것인가 빨간물로 그득 찬 것인가? 대법원 전원일치 판결서에는 20개 판시사항이 있다. 판사는 판시사항 이외에 대해서는 팥단하지 않는다. 그런데 20개의 판사시상 그 어디에도 “5.18에 북한이 개입했는지의 여부”라는 취지의 판사사항이 없다. 민주화 여부에 대해 판단하지 않았는데 왜 판사들은 사돈의 팔촌 관계도 없는 대법원 판결을 내걸고 새로운 연구 결과를 범죄시하는 것인가? 전두환이 내란죄로 처벌받으면 북한군이 절대로 올 수 없다?

 

    줄기차게 시도된 진상규명과정에서도 북한군 개입 규명한적 없다

 

또한 판사들은 “5.18에 대한 진상규명 과정이 여러 차례 있었지만 북한군 개입 사실이 밝혀진바 없다”는 말로 새로운 연구를 범죄시한다. 5.18진상규명 작업은 크게 세 차례 있었다. 1988. 2005. 2017. 하지만 그 때마다 “진상규명범위”에는 “북한군 개입여부“가 명시된 바 없었다. 북한군 개입 여부에 대해서는 누구도 상상하지 않았기 때문이다. 대법원이 판시사항에 대해서만 판결하듯이 진상규명도 ‘규명범위’에 대해서만 규명한다. 북한군 개입여부가 진상범위에 들어 간 것은 이번 ‘5.18진상규명법’이 처음이다. 이 법은 앞으로 2-3년 동안 북한군 개입여부를 규명하라고 명령하고 있다. 그런데 규명작업은 시작도 안 했는데 북한군 개입 표현을 왜 범죄시하는 것인가? 

The Allegation That May 18th Was Pro-Democracy Movement, But No Truth-Finding Investigation Ever Made

 

The Supreme Court judgement was made without having gone through truth-finding investigation. They recognized it as a pro-democracy movement only according to the allegations of politicians but without any grounds, and by utilizing it as a barometer, they punished former President Jon Doo-Hwan as a suppressor. This was an illegal act.

 

The May 18th is a history. History is recorded through the process of research. There is not a chance for the Judiciary to do research on the May 18th. Research on history belongs to the realm of learning, not to the realm of justice. The judgement of the Supreme Court on July 14 1997 was a judicial document by which they held a criminal trial against Jon Doo-Hwan on political purpose and punished him on the charge of rebellion. The fact that Jon Doo-Hwan was punished on the charge of rebellion and the fact that North Korean Troops intervened in the May 18th have nothing to do with each other, like the most remote relatives as good as utter strangers. But the judges emphasize that “the Supreme Court judged that the May 18th was a pro-democracy movement”, and rule that doing research of it is a crime. Are the Judges empty-headed or are their heads full of red water? The unanimous judgement of the Supreme Court has 20 particulars of decision. Judges do not make judgements other than these particulars. By the way, there is no particulars of decision to the effect that “whether North Korea had intervened in the May 18th or not” anywhere in that 20 particulars. Despite the Supreme Court has never made any decision on whether it was a pro-democracy movement or not, then why do the judges regard new research as a crime by hanging out the judgement of the Supreme Court that has nothing to do with it like utter stranger? What a nonsense it is to think, --- if Jon Doo-Hwan is punished on the charge of rebellion, then North Korean troops can never come down---?

 

In the Course of Truth-Finding Persistently Attempted, No Investigative Inquiry Had Ever Been Made Into North Korean Troops Intervention

 

Judges regard new research as a crime again by saying, “the May 18th had gone through the process of truth-finding a few times before, but North Korean troops‘ intervention has never been confirmed as a fact”. So far they have conducted the May 18th truth-finding investigation three times in 1988, 2005 and 2017. But every time then, ”whether North Korean troops intervened or not“ was not specified in the ”category of truth-finding inquiry“. It was because no one had ever imagined of whether North Korean troops intervened or not. Just like the Supreme Court makes decision only on the particulars of decision, the truth-finding authorities make investigative inquiry only within the category of the inquiry. ‘The May 18th Truth-Finding Law’ lately enacted is the first law ever to put the clause of ”whether North Korean troops intervened or not“ into the category of inquiry. This law orders to make inquiry and investigation on whether North Korean troops intervened or not for another two or three years. Until now no inquiry or investigation has yet begun, but why do they regard the expression of North Korean troops intervention as a crime?

 

2018.12.13. 지만원

http://www.systemclub.co.kr/

추천 360