Second, the defendant did not report an assembly in advance because he did not hold an assembly to inform the occupants of the apartment of the fact that the apartment management fee is being executed unfairly, but did not do any act of force or influence, and this is an act within the scope permitted under the social norms.

Even if it is not punishable, it is not punishable.

2. Determination

A. First, the prior report of the Assembly and Demonstration Act (hereinafter “Act”) on the First Claim is for the purpose of having the administrative authorities, such as the police authorities, etc., give time to make preparations necessary for the proper holding of assemblies and for the protection of public safety, and is a report as a duty of cooperation.

In the system of the entire provision of the Assembly and Demonstration Act, the Assembly and Demonstration Act guarantees that outdoor assemblies and demonstrations can be conducted in general and in principle if only certain reporting procedures are conducted. Therefore, the prior reporting system on assemblies does not violate the prohibition of prior permission under Article 21(2) of the Constitution.

The report under Article 6 (1) of the Assembly and Demonstration Act is important information that enables necessary measures, such as the maintenance of order, etc., and it is merely a provision that requires a prior report at least 48 hours before an assembly is held at the latest.

shall not be deemed to exist.

In the case of so-called “emergency assembly”, it cannot be punished by applying Article 22(2) of the Assembly and Demonstration Act to the report as soon as possible. Thus, the above provision violates the excessive prohibition principle and thus does not infringe on the freedom of assembly.

Article 22 of the Assembly and Demonstration Act is highly likely to infringe on the administrative purpose of the report system and cause danger to public safety and order.