Source photo” alt=”The Lee Myung-bak and Park Geun-hye governments, the conservative governments, also prevented the spread of warfare against North Korea several times in order to manage the crisis. On July 27, 2015, during the Park Geun-hye administration, on the road near Imjingak, Paju City, Gyeonggi-do, a truck carrying a North Korean flyer prepared by the National Federation of Sending North Korean flyers, plastic balloons, and hydrogen cans is stopped by the police as they head to Imjingak. They canceled the spread of the warfare against North Korea. Material photo” />-
The conservative governments Lee Myung-bak and Park Geun-hye also blocked the spread of warfare against North Korea several times as a risk management measure. On July 27, 2015, during the Park Geun-hye administration, on the road near Imjingak, Paju City, Gyeonggi-do, a truck carrying a North Korean flyer prepared by the National Federation of Sending North Korean flyers, plastic balloons, and hydrogen cans is stopped by the police as they head to Imjingak. They canceled the spread of the warfare against North Korea. Material photo
–
–
On the 14th, the National Assembly plenary session was passed through the’Partial Amendment of the Act on the Development of Inter-Korean Relations’ (the so-called law on the prohibition of spreading shears to North Korea), which regulates the spreading of warfare to North Korea in the border area with North Korea. Over this law, conservative opposition parties and the media attack day after day, saying, “It violates the freedom of expression and aids the human rights suppression of the North Korean regime.” Some US lawmakers and human rights groups are also joining. This is an old argument that came out whenever the issue of warfare against North Korea was raised. As it has been said, the spread of warfare against North Korea is useless. This is because it not only worsens inter-Korean relations, threatens the safety of residents in the border region, but also does not help North Korean human rights. This revision of the law is a mansijitan. Some criticize it as’Kim Yeo-jung and Ha Myung-beop’. It’s a poor argument that doesn’t match the facts. In addition to the 21st National Assembly, lawmakers have proposed 14 related laws since the 18th, 19th, and 20th National Assembly. If it is Kim Yeo-jung and Ha Myung-beop, the Korean National Assembly is the same as the story of the subordinate of Kim’s subordinate. This kind of political offensive is a self-educational act that defames our nationality. The suspension of spreading shear is also the implementation of the April 27 Panmunjom Declaration. Freedom of expression should also be respected, but freedom of expression is not superior to the life and safety of the people. In October 2014, North Korea fired air against the North Korean warfare and we fired in response, raising tensions. Whenever this happens, residents near the truce line appealed to stop spraying leaflets, saying, “If you spray a beret, we get bombs.” The Supreme Court also ruled in 2016 that’the North Korean warfare is recognized as freedom of expression (the border area), but the obvious and existing threat to the lives and property of the people is the basis for limiting freedom’. The act of spreading flyers is a means of psychological warfare against the enemy. It is for this reason that North Korea has warned of firing by seeing the spraying of warfare against North Korea as a hostile act. There is always a risk that an accidental collision caused by the spraying of warfare against North Korea will spread to an all-out war. For this reason, the Lee Myung-bak and Park Geun-hye governments also blocked the spread of warfare against North Korea several times as a risk management measure. There is also a lack of evidence that the North Korean war mission improves human rights in North Korea. In November 2014, Saenuri Party Rep. Ha Tae-kyung argued, “The spreading of warfare to North Korea is an act to show (North Korean refugee groups) supporters, and there are very few flyers going to North Korea.” Particularly, the attitude of rethinking the controversy over the North Korea warfare against the arguments of some US officials is even in trouble. As a party to inter-Korean relations, we must have a sense of ownership.- .
