If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

As the Defendant was 5678 Urban Railroad Trade Union D, on November 1, 2015, the Defendant was ordered to participate in a public-private partnership assembly scheduled to be held on November 14, 2015 through the internal communication network, and occupied the roads, such as occupying the two-way lanes in front of the Jongno-gu Seoul E-building along with an unspecified large number of demonstration teams from around 16:56 to 18:00 on November 14, 2015.

Accordingly, the Defendant conspired with many unspecified demonstration teams to interfere with the traffic of roads used for the general public.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Photographsic materials, relevant photographs, and road occupancy photographs;

1. Diplomatic order;

1. Application of investigation reports (Details of telephone conversations between a suspect and telephone conversations), investigation reports (Attachment of video images with an order of dissolution) and statutes;

1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act and Articles 185 and 30 of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of penalties;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Determination as to the assertion by the defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The assertion;

A. The defendant's act of taking part in the assembly of this case does not fall under the acts of obstruction of general traffic, damage, destruction by fire or other methods corresponding to them.

(b) the costs of the demonstration had already been installed by the police prior to the commencement of the demonstration, and the traffic on the land has been obstructed due to the above-mentioned chassis, so it does not interfere with the traffic on the land due to the road occupation of the demonstration team.

C. The Defendant did not have any intention or conspiracy to obstruct traffic as a simple participant in an assembly.

2. Determination

A. As to “other means of interference with general traffic” under Article 185 of the Criminal Act, the defense counsel not only uses a physical method corresponding to the destruction and damage in the form of the act of interference with general traffic, but also exercises a strong tangible power.