rights defenders (2014)”, “Concluding observations on the fourth periodic reports of the Republic of Korea (UNHRC, 2015), “Reports of the U.N. special rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association (2016)” and “Concluding observations on the combined third to fifth periodic reports of the Republic of Korea (the Committee, 2017)” point out the possible abuse and misuse of the National Security Act, and damage to political pluralism and restriction of freedom of expression brought by article 7 of the same act. 20. The Constitutional Court ruled that the provisions contained in article 7-1 of the “National Security Act” −A person who praises, incites or propagates the activities or who acts in concert with it, with the knowledge of the fact that it may endanger the existence and security of the State of democratic fundamental order− and the provisions in article 7-5 of the same act −Any person who manufactures, holds, distributes or acquires any documents, drawings or other expression materials, with intention of committing the act as referred to in paragraph (1)− do not violate the void for vagueness of the principle of Nulla Poena Sine Lege. (Constitutional Court Decision 2012Heonba95 Decided 30 April 2015) 21. The Supreme Court ruled that on the condition that the operator of the private internet posting space, who has the authority to delete postings of others, did not delete but left the posting of others, it cannot be deemed as “possession” of the posting (Supreme Court Decision 2010Do8336 Decided January 27, 2020). The Court also decided that just “following” the account “Uriminzokkiri” −North Korea’s official twitter account− does not conform to “distribution”, “aid and abetment” or “possession” of enemy-benefitting expression materials in article 7-5 of the National Security Act (Supreme Court Decision 2016Do18715 Decided January 25, 2018). 10