Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,200,00.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

A. Defendant 1) On the charge of obstruction of general traffic in the indictment of this case, the charges of this case concerning obstruction of traffic are merely referred to as “lanes adjacent to the Gyeongwon Station,” and it is difficult to find out which way the traffic obstruction place refers to one lane near the Gyeongwon Station, and the Assembly and Demonstration Act (hereinafter “the Assembly and Demonstration Act”).

(2) As to the facts charged in the instant case regarding the violation, the place of demonstration is referred to as “lanes adjacent to the enemy, luminous, East Cross, and inside,” and the place and route of demonstration are not specifically specified, thereby infringing the Defendant’s right to defense. (2) In order to contact news and to speak the conflict between the police and the demonstration group, the Defendant was arrested, and there was no fact that he participated in the act of demonstration and traffic obstruction, as described in the facts charged in the instant case.

3) In order to establish a general traffic obstruction by misapprehending the legal principles, the direct intent of the traffic obstruction and the obvious degree of traffic obstruction should be recognized. In this case, the causal relationship between the Defendant’s act and the result of the Defendant’s act cannot be acknowledged. 4) The sentencing of the lower court on the grounds that the sentencing of an unreasonable sentencing (fine 1.2 million won) is too unreasonable.

B. The lower court’s sentencing is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. We examine ex officio the judgment on the grounds for appeal ex officio.

The lower court deemed that the crime of violation of the Assembly and Demonstration Act and the crime of general traffic obstruction due to participation in outdoor demonstration at night are in substantive competition relations, and sentenced to an aggravated punishment for concurrent crimes within the scope of the sum of statutory penalty for each of the above crimes.

However, it is deemed that the assembly and demonstration and the general traffic obstruction thereby constituted are in a mutually competitive relationship (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Do10960, Aug. 25, 201).