beta
Text
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
The defendant shall be innocent.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. At the time of mistake of facts, the Defendant did not take part in the assembly with a photographer, but did not interfere with the traffic of the road by occupying the road in collusion with other participants in the assembly.
B. The Defendant’s act constitutes a justifiable act under Article 20 of the Criminal Act, as it is for documentary production with respect to the exercise of public authority.
C. The court below’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (the fine of 1.5 million won) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. A. A summary of the facts charged (1) On August 15, 2014, the Defendant: (a) around 14:40 to 17:35 on August 15, 2014, the Defendant: (b) took part in the “National Countermeasure Meeting for the Sewol Ferry” organized by the Central Committee of the Seoul Western-ro 1, Jung-gu, Seoul, and 3,000 participants in other assemblies; and (c) took up eight lanes from around 19:05 to from around 22:00 of the same day to the end 2:00, both directions interfered with the traffic of vehicles.
Accordingly, the defendant conspired with the above participants in the assembly and interfered with the traffic by land.
(2) On May 1, 2015, at around 15:00 to 16:30 on May 1, 2015, the Defendant: (a) attended an assembly of the 2015 National Workers’ Congress in which more than 22,00 members of the Labor Union by organizing the Korean Democratic Labor Union Federation at the above Seoul square at around 15:0 to 16:30 on May 1, 2015, the Defendant interfered with the traffic of vehicles, such as moving 17:0 to 19:00 on the day after the 17:0 to 19:00 on the day of the movement of 2,00 members of the Labor Union to the 2015 National Workers’ Congress; and (b) the participants of the assembly were able to move to the road in front of the Changdong-gu in Jongno-gu.
Accordingly, the defendant conspired with the above participants in the assembly and interfered with the traffic on the land.
B. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged by comprehensively taking account of the evidence presented in the lower judgment.
C. The court below duly adopted and investigated the judgment of the court below.