집회및시위에관한법률위반등
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the factual error) is that the Defendant did not participate in the demonstration from June 10, 2008 to June 11, 2008, as stated in the judgment of the court below, and there is no time between the Defendant and the road except on the road for the purpose of life-saving at around 09:00 on June 11, 2008. < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 20619, Jun. 11, 2008>
In other words, even though the defendant participated in the assembly on June 10, 2008, he left the assembly site before 24:00 and sent a public performance or night from the PC room on June 11, 2008, he going to the road for the purpose of witnessing a traffic accident and providing relief at the demonstration site again on June 11, 2008.
2. Comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, the Defendant continued to participate in the instant demonstration from June 10, 2008, and the Defendant participated in the traffic obstruction act in collusion with other participants of the demonstration.
① On June 10, 2008, the Defendant was killed and wounded for the purpose of participating in the assembly while residing in Daejeon.
② At the time of the instant case, the participants of the demonstration were dissolved by little time according to the flow while occupying the road at night and moving on the road at night. On June 11, 2008, around 09:00, about 100 to 200.
③ Even after the dispersion order, the police and the participants of the demonstration were not dissolved, two of the participants of the demonstration who participated in the demonstration, who were sent to the 119 fire-fighting vehicle, was involved in the accident and transported to the 119 fire-fighting vehicle. At that time, the police arrested the rest participants of the demonstration on board the bus after checking whether they will take passengers on the police bus.
④ The Defendant stated to the effect that he participated in an assembly from June 10, 2008 in the police investigation process on the date of arrest, and there was no statement to the effect that he left the assembly site and sent him at any other place.
Defendant’s assertion is without merit.
3. As the appeal by the defendant is groundless, Article 364 of the Criminal Procedure Act is not reasonable.