A. In contrast to misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles, the Defendant’s proposal by H organization (hereinafter “H organization”), but the Defendant did not make a proposal directly prepared by H organization absatum.

In addition to M, N,O, P, Q, and R R's participation in the process of T-rewing, the National Institute of Korean History approved that S's success in the process of T-rewing, the H organization's failure was excluded from S's failure during the 7 minutes Mauritius 1, and this was merely an unfair behavior contrary to Korean history, social order, and ethical sentiment.

This is a legitimate act under the Criminal Code, but the court below which pronounced guilty of the defendant is erroneous in misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles.

B. In consideration of the various circumstances of unreasonable sentencing, the sentence of the lower court (the fine of KRW 500,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court, the Defendant’s organization C (hereinafter “C organization”) is entitled to the determination of mistake and misapprehension of legal doctrine.

As its officers, C organization’s president and other members of H organization shall communicate with each other in order to prevent U.S. to be held by H organization. On April 3, 2011, the fact that H organization arrived at the site before raising a proposal, the members of H organization went to I in order to raise a proposal, and the Defendant prevented the members of the H organization from entering the G cemetery, which was called that they would not enter the grave, and the members of other female members were sitting in I stairs, and prevented the entry of H organization. The members of the H organization from entering the H organization by setting up a platform by standing in I stairs, and the members V may find the fact that they go to the right time on the ground of the defect intending to give up the I entry from H organization and to remove the Ma. According to the above fact of recognition, even if the Defendant did not act on the ground of a direct proposal, the organizations including the Defendant and the members of the H organization using physical force, such as a large number of members.