After recognizing the circumstances indicated in its reasoning, the lower court: (a) acknowledged that the act of hosting the outdoor assembly of this case clearly exceeded the scope of the outdoor assembly, such as the place, method, etc. reported under Article 16(4)3 of the Assembly and Demonstration Act; (b) considerably deviates from the scope of the initial report; or (c) seriously interferes with road traffic by violating the conditions under Article 12 of the Assembly and Demonstration Act.

For the reasons that it is difficult to see the Defendants, the first instance judgment that acquitted the Defendants on the charges of this case on the grounds that there is no proof of crime.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and records, the above determination by the lower court is justifiable, and contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, it did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending

Therefore, all appeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.