2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the Defendants.

A. On December 16, 2016 and December 19, 2016, the Plaintiff reported an assembly and demonstration (hereinafter “instant assembly and demonstration”) to the Commissioner of the Local Police Agency of the Seoul Special Metropolitan City, and the head of the police station of the Seoul Special Metropolitan City on December 16, 2012, respectively, with the same content as the attached Table 1’s “matters to be reported on assembly”.

B. On December 20, 2016, the Defendants informed the Plaintiff of the condition that they partially restrict the method of assembly and demonstration, including each item of “matters of notification of conditions” as set out in attached Table 2, based on Article 12 of the Assembly and Demonstration Act (hereinafter “Act”).

(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”). [Grounds for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, entry of Gap’s 1 through 5 (including branch numbers) and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the lawsuit of this case is lawful

A. If the effect of a notice disposition on restriction of an assembly and demonstration was suspended and it was possible to hold the assembly and demonstration as reported at the scheduled date and time and place, it is reasonable to deem that the organizer of the assembly and demonstration has already achieved that purpose.

Therefore, in this case, there is no legal interest in seeking the cancellation of the notification disposition on assembly and demonstration restrictions.

As to the instant case, it is evident in the record that the validity of the instant disposition was suspended until the pronouncement of the judgment of the instant case was made on December 22, 2016, and there is no dispute between the parties that the Plaintiff was holding an assembly and demonstration in accordance with the report of the instant assembly and demonstration.

Therefore, since the plaintiff has already achieved the purpose of holding an assembly and demonstration, there is no legal interest to seek cancellation of the disposition of this case.

B. As to this, the Plaintiff’s illegal disposition is likely to be repeated due to the same cause as the instant disposition, it may be deemed that there is a need for explanation of legal issues with respect to which illegality is verified or unclear.