It seems, more than anything, you’ve added a rather arbitrary set of characteristics that makes very little material difference in order to label the DPRK a “dynasty,” a term that has negative connotations, despite it being pretty similar to other countries. Especially when we factor in siege, and intense sanctions. As for the general secretary having power, this is true, but it isn’t the same as being the “de facto leader.” For many characteristics, it can be seen as such, but again, the DPRK has more distributed governance than, say, the US. Thus, “supreme leaders” have often less authority than US presidents.