A. Defendant

In light of the fact that most of the assemblies in which the defendant participated were peaceful, and the police's excessive suppression was the beginning in case of some assemblies in which violence was committed, and that the defendant was living in good faith without any particular criminal history before the crime of this case, the punishment of the court below is too unreasonable.

(b) Prosecutors;

Unlike the previous peaceful assembly, an assembly in which the Defendant participated has already been changed to an illegal nature for the purpose of anti-government ruptures, etc., and in the process of such assembly, repeated acts such as assault, former bus seizure, etc. have been committed during the process of such assembly, and the Defendant participated in illegal assemblies and continued to participate in illegal assemblies even after being arrested and released on two occasions, etc., the sentence of the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

The arguments of the defendant and the prosecutor are also examined.

In the democratic decision-making process, collective expression of opinion is essential, and legitimate assemblies and demonstrations should be guaranteed to the maximum extent possible, but in the case of a large number of assemblies and demonstrations, the order is disturbed and the public safety and order may be endangered and the public safety and order should also be harmed to prevent it.

However, the Defendant’s crime of this case, beyond expressing his own will in a peaceful way through legitimate procedures, tried to combine police buses installed as a barriers to accomplish his opinion by using the above situation, and committed collective assault by spreading a boom that is to suppress the demonstration, which is an act of endangering public safety and order and creating anxiety for the majority of the people, cannot be justified even if the excessive suppression by the police that suppress the demonstration was partly caused. Thus, it is essential to protect the general public from unlawful and violent assemblies, and to impose liability corresponding thereto for the purpose of developing and peaceful demonstration culture and establishing a more peaceful and peaceful demonstration culture. It is also unnecessary to hold the police responsible.

On the other hand, the defendant was actively involved in the assembly of this case in pure intent to express his own opinion in the idea that the initial interest of the whole citizens is not sufficiently reflected in the national pending issues, and even though there was a fact that he participated in the violent assembly of this case, he did not lead or lead it. There was no particular criminal power prior to the instant case, and currently as a youth preparing employment, he did not participate in illegal assemblies, and did not reflect his act and deposited money with the victim prior to the damage.

In full view of the above circumstances, the sentence of the court below, which sentenced the victim to a suspended sentence of imprisonment, is deemed appropriate, and it cannot be deemed that the defendant and the prosecutor's assertion are too heavy or unreasonable.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Lee Jae-sung (Presiding Judge)