The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment on the first ground of appeal in light of the evidence duly admitted by the lower court, each of the instant assemblies and demonstrations constitutes an assembly or demonstration which clearly poses a direct threat to public peace and order by means of collective assault, intimidation, destruction, damage, fire prevention, etc., on the grounds indicated in its reasoning.

The defendant, while knowing that he participated in each of the assemblies and demonstrations in this case, is justifiable. Contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, the defendant did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal principles on Article 22(4) of the Assembly and Demonstration Act.

2. On the ground of appeal No. 2, based on its reasoning, the lower court determined that the Defendant and other participants at the demonstration site of the instant case constituted a conspiracy relationship with respect to this part of the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties on the ground of its stated reasoning, and that even if the injury suffered by the police officer was due to the assault by other participants of the demonstration in the instant case, the Defendant cannot be exempted from the liability for the crime of obstruction of official duties on the ground that the Defendant could have sufficiently predicted such injury.

Examining the relevant legal principles and the records in light of the evidence duly admitted by the court below, the above judgment of the court below is just, and contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, there were no errors by misapprehending the legal principles on joint principal

3. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.