A. Fact-finding or misunderstanding of legal principles that the Defendant did not report to the competent police station, but did not report to the competent police station the same press conference as indicated in the facts charged (hereinafter “the instant press conference”). However, since the conclusion of the joint press team in the astronomical wave was highly likely to undermine the tension of the Korean Peninsula, and thus, prompt expression of opinion was necessary, there was an imminent circumstance that could not be reported within 48 hours, and the said press conference did not directly cause any direct danger to the legal interests of others or public safety and order.

Therefore, even though the press opinion of this case was dismissed as a legitimate act, and the defendant was acquitted, the judgment of the court below is erroneous or erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The lower court’s sentence on the Defendant of unreasonable sentencing (the fine of 500,000 won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, the defendant did not report to the competent police station, and the defendant can see society in a state where many and unspecified people can see or hear by preparing fla cards, microphones and diskettes, etc. in advance, and on the contrary, it was urgent that the press dog of this case by the defendant could not be reported in advance.

There is no circumstance or data that can be readily concluded that the said press dog did not pose any risk to the legal interests of others.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

B. Although there is no record of criminal punishment against the Defendant regarding the assertion on unfair sentencing, the lower court’s sentence is unreasonable, taking into account all the factors of sentencing, including the Defendant’s content of the crime, the method of law, the background of the crime, the Defendant’s attitude after the crime, and the circumstances after the crime.