1. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is as follows: from around 05 to around 12:15 on October 30, 2012, the Defendant took part in the Nowon-gu Seoul Jongno-gu No. 250 class members participating in the street, and the Defendant conspired with the participants in the assemblies over the two-lanes, such as the passage of the road between 12:30 and 15:45 on the same day, with the 250 participants in the above No. No. 250 class members, from around the front of the citizen heating in the north of the luminous square, the East Cross, the building front of the Turg, and the west building to the long-distance of the inside country through the front of the front of the road through the front of the front of the 4-lane road to the front of the front of the road, driving along the road without driving along the other lanes, and obstructing the passage of the disabled and the participants in the assemblies over the road.

2. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence adopted by the court below, approximately 250 participants of the demonstration such as the defendant: From 40 to 55, the court below found the defendant not guilty on October 32, 2012 without reporting to the chief of the competent police station; since 30 to 15:0, it was difficult for the defendant to walk the 4-lane or 6-lane road on the front of the citizen heat in the front of the luminous square, the Turg building, and the front of the front of the front of the front of the front of the front of the front road in order to find it difficult for the defendant to walk the 5-lane road or walk the wheel road in the direction of the direction of the direction of the traffic movement between the 12-lane and the 12-lane road in the direction of the vehicle participating in the demonstration, and the remaining vehicles participating in the demonstration such as the direction of the direction of the vehicle participating in the demonstration such as the direction of the traffic on the front of the direction of the vehicle: The traffic on the 10-lane.

3. However, it is difficult to accept the above determination by the court below for the following reasons.

A. The purpose of Article 185 of the Criminal Act is to punish all acts of causing the passage of the general public or making it considerably difficult by damaging or infusing land, etc. or interfering with traffic by other means (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Do7086, Mar. 29, 2012).

B. Comprehensively taking account of the facts acknowledged by the court below and the evidence duly admitted by the court below, approximately 250 participants of the demonstration, including the defendant, held an assembly without undergoing the reporting procedure in accordance with the Assembly and Demonstration Act, and conducted a demonstration by occupying all the remaining lanes other than the four or six lanes in the middle or six lanes in the middle or a six-lane in the city of Pyeongtaek, and it is difficult to view that the above road occupation has been continuously occupied for about 75 minutes, and it is merely a temporary occupation.

In addition, according to the evidence duly admitted by the court below, in the course of the demonstration, the defendant tried to enter the center line when he occupies the roadway at the edge of the demonstration zone while occupying the roadway, and occupied one opposite lane beyond the center line after receiving a police officer who was carrying a police officer who controls more than the center line. The defendant allowed the participants of other electric wheel project to stop on the road because the vehicle that passed along with the participants of the other electric wheel chairs would cause concerns about the accident of the vehicle that passed by the vehicle around the road. In full view of these circumstances, the defendant's above act causes a significant obstacle to the passage of the vehicle that passed along the above road.

The court below found the defendant et al. not guilty of this part of the facts charged on the ground that it is difficult for the part of the judgment below to view that the defendant et al. to recognize that the passage of the vehicle was considerably difficult because the passage of the vehicle was caused by a heavy stop on the road above, although the police officers, who called the defendant et al., moving along the road as above, failed to move along the road in the direction by properly dividing one lane and the opposite part of the way opposite to the road in the direction of the passage, and the passage of a somewhat across the two directions, it could be viewed that the passage of the vehicle was not impossible, but it does not interfere with the passage of the vehicle. The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the obstruction of general traffic, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

4. Therefore, the lower judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded to the lower court for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Kim Yong-deok

Justices Park Poe-young

Justices Kim Jae-han