209 Highest 293(a)General traffic obstruction

209 Highest 515 b) Violation of the Building Act

(C) Violation of the Assembly and Demonstration Act;

209 Highest 1160 Rad. Violation of the Road Act

209 fixed 641(combined). Violation of the Public Property and Commodity Management Act

F. Violation of the State Public Officials Act

1.(a)(c)(d)(f) A;

2. B

3. (f) C.

Freeboards

Law Firm D, Attorneys E (Defendant A)

Attorney F (for the defendant B and C)

January 11, 201

Defendant A shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,500,000, and Defendant B and C shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,500,000. In the event that the Defendants fail to pay the said fine, the Defendants shall be confined in the workhouse for the period calculated by converting each of the above fines of KRW 50,000 into one day.

To order the Defendants to pay an amount equivalent to each of the above fines.

Criminal History [2009 Highest 293: Defendant A]

1. Defendant A’s status and background of the case are the teachers of G Elementary School in Chuncheon City, and Defendant A was a state public official, and was engaged in activities at H Trade Union (hereinafter “H”) on March 25, 191. From January 1, 2009, Defendant A was engaged in activities as “H Gangwon-gu Head from January 1, 2009.” In relation to the diagnosis and assessment conducted on November 5, 2008 by the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology for the 4-5th year nationwide elementary school, Defendant A refused the diagnosis and assessment on the ground that the Dong-gu Office of Education was in violation of a collective agreement by four persons, such as the teachers of the elementary school and the J-5 year teachers at the 4-5th class at the elementary school in the same year.

Therefore, the superintendent of the Dong Sea Office of Education made a request for disciplinary action against the above four persons, and it was found that the Gangwon-do Office of Education tried to hold the disciplinary committee around January 2009 with respect to the above four persons, and Defendant A had the mind to achieve the withdrawal of the disciplinary return and the implementation of collective agreements by means of farming and demonstration, etc. on the grounds of "unfair return to disciplinary action and withdrawal of collective agreements

2. Criminal facts;

A. Violation of the Building Act

Defendant A, at around 15:40 on January 5, 2009, made the pole and beams by poppy without obtaining permission from the authorities on the road in front of the due diligence of the Gangwon-do Office of Education located in the Seocheon-si, Gangwon-do, the Gangwon-do Office of Education on the road, made the roof and walls by means of a ballon tent, built a temporary building of 5 meters in width, 2 meters in height, and 3 meters in height on the floor by putting the sti pumps on the wall of the tent, cover the plastic vinyl on the wall, and installed a tent, which is the above temporary building, from that time to the 30th day of the same month, from that time, at around 10:30 on the 10th day of the same month, the said temporary building was installed.

(b) General traffic obstruction;

Defendant A constructed a temporary building, such as the description of the above paragraph (a), on the front of the office of education of Gangwon-do, in front of the same month from the date stated in the above paragraph (a) to the 11:00 of the same month, thereby hindering traffic by allowing the teachers and staff, the general public, and their vehicles to enter the office of education. A person who intends to occupy and use a road in violation of the Road Act shall obtain permission from the management agency. Defendant A did not obtain permission from 10:30 of the same month to 10:00 of the same month from 10:30 of the same month to 10:00 of the same month. Defendant A occupied and used the road, without obtaining permission, by installing the above tent installed on

(d) Violation of the Assembly and Demonstration Act;

Defendant A reported to the head of the Chuncheon police station from January 5, 2009 to January 29, 2009 that he/she intends to hold a resolution meeting for dispute settlement of full-time instructors in front of the Gangwon-do Office of Education, and Defendant A had been in front of the due diligence of the Gangwon-do Office of Education from January 5, 2009 that he/she would use the above 3th anniversary of the Gangwon-do Office of Education as the representative of organizer and the maintenance of order. While Defendant A was prohibited from conducting any demonstration after sunrise, he/she was in front of the Gangwon-do Office of Education, the head of the 3rd Office of Education from January 17:06 to 07:07 of the same month, the head of the 3rd Office of Education established the above 19th Office of Education as the 3rd Office of Education, which was a temporary building constructed as described in the above paragraph, and opened the 5th Office of Education to the 10th Office of Education to the 3rd Office of Education to the 5th Office of Education.

[Violation of the State Public Officials Act (Defendant A) and fixed 641 (Defendant B, C)]

As seen above, Defendant A as a teacher of G elementary school from January 1, 2009, is the head of H Gangwon District Office from around 1, 2009. Defendant B is the secretary of H Gangwon District Office as a teacher of G elementary school teachers, Defendant C is the head of H Gangwon District Policy Office as a teacher of H Gangwon District N Elementary School located in Chuncheon City M, and both Defendants are the officers in charge of H Gangwon District Office and working-level officers. HI is the teachers’ trade union organized under the Act on the Establishment and Operation of Teachers’ Trade Union on January 6, 199. H is a teacher’s trade union organized by Seoul, Gyeonggi-do, Busan, Daegu, Incheon, Incheon, Gwangju, Ulsan, Ulsan, Ulsan, Ulsan, Ulsan, Chungcheongnam, Chungcheongnam, Chungcheongnam, Chungcheongnamnam, Chungcheongnamnam, Chungcheongnam, North Korea, North Korea, Gyeongnam-do, and 16 members and 25 members of the Gu-Si/Gun branch and its affiliated offices.

The Defendants were able to criticize government policies and to publish the Declaration of Assembly with the signatures of teachers as well as teachers and their members, such as H P P, senior vice-chairperson Q, R of Seoul, Busan Branch S, Daegu Branch T, Incheon Branch V, Gwangju Branch V, Daejeon Branch X, Daejeon Branch X, Ulsan District Department Y, Chungcheong Branch AA, Jeonnam Branch AB, Jeonnam Branch AC, Gyeongnam Branch AD, Gyeongnam Branch AD, Gyeongnam Branch AE, and the Jeju Branch AF.

H resolved on June 9, 200 to criticize the present government's policies and demanded the government reform at the meeting of the 360th Central Execution Committee held at the H headquarters office of H on June 9, 2009, and then close the Assembly by 17 days since the signature on the website of each branch could not be rapidly organized at the time of signing on June 11, 2009 or June 15, 2009. In the branch, the teachers' list is sent to the branch, by facsimile, and it is possible for non-members to send the list to the branch, by sending the list to the branch, by facsimile, and by sending the official document by facsimile as the title "the notification of the Si/Gu Office Declaration of Private," with the head of the branch of each school as the addressee, until June 17, 2009, the number of persons participating in the declaration and the list of each branch as the center.

On June 11, 2009, Hwon Branch was called "request for cooperation with signatures related to teachers in June 1, 2009 under the name of the head of HGG branch", and now on June 22, 1987, the democratic era of this land has been set off, and human rights is seriously fluence. He is proceeding with the Assembly to protect the minor value of democratic resistance in June 1, 200. The reporter is expected to make public through the "AG", which is the news materials and H branch. It is expected that the reporter will sign the attached declaration and sent it to FX (AH) by June 17, 2009. The signature paper will be sent to the President of the HG branch by means of facsimile, and will be sent to the President of the HG branch by means of a document and facsimile. The signature paper will be sent to the 10th page and will be sent to the President of the HG branch. The signature paper will be sent to the 10th page.

On June 18, 200, around 11:00, 10 members of P and H 10 members of H 10 who were the chairman of the Jung-gu Seoul Central Executive Council opened a 10th session, and announced the 6th anniversary of the 6th anniversary of the 19th anniversary of the 19th anniversary of the 6th anniversary of the 6th anniversary of the 1st anniversary of the 6th anniversary of the 6th anniversary of the 6th anniversary of the 6th anniversary of the 1st anniversary of the 6th anniversary of the 6th anniversary of the 6th anniversary of the 6th anniversary of the 6th anniversary of the 6th anniversary of the 6th anniversary of the 1st anniversary of the 6th anniversary of the 6th anniversary of the 1st anniversary of the 1st election of the Republic of Korea. We may not call for the 1st anniversary of the 1st anniversary of the 1st anniversary of the 1st election of the Republic of Korea.

In the process of the assembly and demonstration of H, Defendant A, the president of the HD branch, participated in the process of determining the policy for the assembly and demonstration of H as a central executor’s member. After that, Defendant B, the head of the HD branch, participated in the process of the assembly and demonstration of H with Defendant B, the head of the Gangwon-gu branch’s policy office, together with Defendant C, etc., who is the head of the HD branch, who is the head of the NG branch. In contact with the head of the sub-branch and the head of the sub-branch through wire language, text message, e-mail, etc., and urged the members of the NG branch to participate in the assembly and demonstration of the members of the NG branch, and led to the participation of the teachers

In the end, the Defendants conspired with H executives and teachers belonging to the Defendants, thereby collectively engaging in activities other than official duties.

[209 Highest 1160: Defendants]

1. The Defendants’ violation of the State Public Officials Act due to the Second Declaration was established on May 28, 1989 and was established on January 6, 199 by the Act on the Establishment and Operation of Teachers’ Unions. H has 16 wide-area branches, such as Seoul, Gyeonggi-do, Daegu-do, Incheon-do, Gwangju-do, Daejeon, Ulsan-do, Ulsan, Chungcheongnam, Chungcheongnam-do, Chungcheongnam, Chungcheongnam-do, Chungcheongnam-do, Chungcheongnam-do, Chungcheongnam-do, Chungcheongnam-do, Chungcheongnam-do, Jeonnam-do, and Jeju-do, 252 sub-branches established on the basis of the Gu/Si/Gun’s school units, and 9,754 sub-branches established on the basis of the members’ school units.

H On June 18, 2009, the title "The Government will not add the heavy value to the dispute over democracy in June 1, 2009." 1. The Government will thoroughly guarantee the freedom and human rights of the press and assembly and conscience guaranteed by the Constitution as well as the state against the abuse of public power. 1. The government suspended anti- democratic malicious acts such as the Media Act, etc. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 2. 1. 1. 1. 1. 3. 1. 1. 2. 1. 1. 3. 1. 1. 1. 1. The Declaration of the government'provoking'profluation of human rights, etc.

The Defendants, together with the president P, the senior vice-chairperson Q, R of the Seoul Branch, the Busan Branch S, the Daegu Branch T, the Daejeon Branch V, the Daejeon Branch of the Daejeon Branch, the Daejeon Branch of the Daejeon District Department, the Daejeon Branch of the Gyeonggi District Department X, the Chungcheongnam Branch A, the Chungcheongnam Branch AB of the Chungcheong Branch AB, the Jeonnam Branch AB, the Jeonnam Branch AC, the Jeonnam Branch AD of the Jeonnam Branch AD, the Gyeongnam Branch AE of the Gyeongnam Branch of the Gyeongnam Branch, and the members of the H executives and the members of the Ha. In addition, the Defendants were aware of the government’s policy to discipline and prosecute the teachers who participated in the First Declaration (six 18th) and to guarantee the freedom of expression and to stop the suppression of teachers’ carbon. In addition, the Defendants were able to express the second Declaration of the Assembly.

He held at the office of H on June 28, 2009 the Central Execution Committee on the First Declaration against the disciplinary policy of the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology on the First Declaration, and discussed the list of participating teachers through the "AG," which is the H newsletter, after receiving teachers’ signature from each school unit on June 30, 2009 to July 15, 2009 for each branch, and reporting the list by July 15, 200 to the headquarters. FI, as decided in the above 361 Central Execution Committee (E. 6.28.14:00 on July 14, 200, the chairman at the front of the Seoul Central Public Notice Office of Seoul Special Metropolitan City and the Central Execution Committee on the Second Declaration, guarantee the Republic of Korea’s free speech in the form of a democracy and guarantee the Republic of Korea’s free speech by the 20th National Assembly.

헌법은 모든 국민에게 '언론과 표현의 자유'를 기본권으로 보장하고 있습니다. 그럼에도 불구하고 시국에 대한 입장을 밝혔다는 이유만으로 1만7천에 이르는 교사들을 전원 징계하겠다는 사상 유례없는 교과부의 방침을 접하며 우리 교사들은 이제 민주주의를 어떻게 가르쳐야 할지 당혹스러움을 느낍니다. (중략) 21세기는 ‘소통의 시대'라고 합니다. 우리는 교사들의 시국선언이 국민 대다수가 염원하는 내용을 담았다고 판단합니다. 현 정부는 최근 소통의 부족을 절감한다며 국민과의 소통을 강조하고 있습니다. 우리는 국민의 목소리를 존중하고 이에 귀 기울이려는 대통령의 자세 전환이야말로 현시국의 위기를 극복하고 이 나라의 민주주의를 다시 굳건히 세우는 길이라는 믿음으로, 표현의 자유 보장과 시국선언 교사에 대한 징계 철회를 촉구합니다.”라는 내용의 시국선언문을 ‘P 외 28,634명의 교사 일동' 명의로 발표하고, 같은 날 H 인터넷 홈페이지(AK)에 시국선언문과 참여교사의 명단을 게시하였다.

On July 23, 2009, H published a list of 28,711 state public officials, etc. who expressed their intent to participate in the Assembly and Demonstration at “AG,” which is the H newsletter.

In the above series of processes, the Defendants: (a) held the 8th executive committee of the Hadwon Branch on June 18, 2009 at the Hadwon Branch’s office in 2009 and decided on the case of the 2nd teachers’ proposal; and (b) led the 361 Central Executive Committee (i.e., June 19, 2009) as a member of the H Central Executive Committee; (c) participated in the 2nd resolution of the H’s meeting; (d) together with Defendant B, Defendant C, etc., gathered with the 361 Central Executive Committee (i.e., the 28th branch office’s website, text message, wire currency, e-mail, etc. to contact with the members of the 2nd branch office; and (e) urged the teachers to participate in the 2nd branch office as to the 361st branch office; and (e) ordered the teachers’ participation in the 2nd branch office by leading them.

As a result, the Defendants conspired with the H executives and their members to act in a group for purposes other than official duties.

2. Defendants’ violation of the State Public Officials Act due to the participation in the National Assembly on July 19, 199

On the other hand, around July 8, 200, AL-1 and AM-2, a working group of A00 and AM-1 and BM-1 and the members of A00 and B-1 and the members of A-1 and B-1 and the members of A-2 were to participate in the 30th National Assembly for the second 16th 2nd 2nd 2nd 2nd 7th 2nd 2nd 2nd 2nd 30th 2nd 2nd 3rd 2nd 3rd 2nd 2nd 30th 2nd 3rd 2nd 2nd 30th 1st 2nd 3rd 2nd 2nd 196th 2nd 2nd 2nd 3th 2nd 2nd 3th 2nd 3th 2nd 3th 2nd 3th 2nd 3th 2nd 2nd 2nd 2nd 30th 3th 2nd 3th 2nd 3th 3th 2nd 19.

In the process of the assembly of the above teachers' and public officials' declarations, the P chairperson was listed on the top together with AY BF and the AX chairperson BG, and the H chairperson P made a speech that “The P will endeavor to restore democracy to its original state. In the teacher's declaration, the 30,000 people participate in the teachers' declaration, and the government will be decided by all the public officials, teachers, and people.” The AY BF Chairperson made a speech that “public officials are subject to the declaration of assembly through newspapers. In addition, the government is a change.”

공무원 노조 통합을 이뤄 민생민주를 위한 AO노동조합로 거듭날 것이다”라고 연설하고, AX 위원장 BG은 “AO노동조합는 보수세력과 이 정권에 맞서 싸우고자 깃발을 들었다. 시국선언을 하려하자 정부가 H를 탄압하고 있다. 12월까지 한자리에 모여 AW을 조롱한 것을 심판하자"라고 연설하였고, 집회 참가자들도 “온 국민의 시국선언으로 AI악법 저지하자”, “교사·공무원 단결하여 민주주주의 지켜내자" 라는 구호를 제창하고, '시국선언 탄압 중단', '4대강 죽이기 절대 안돼', '언론악법 저지'라는 정치적 주장이나 구호가 기재된 종이 모자를 쓰고, ‘정부는 쌍용차에 공적자금 투하하라’, ‘해고는 살인이다', '민주주의 죽이지 마라', ‘AI악법 이제 그만, 대한민국을 살려줘’, ‘4대강 삽질 STOP' 등 정치적 구호나 주장이 기재된 피켓을 들고 집회에 참가하였고, 동일한 내용의 유인물도 다량 배포되었다. 연이어 열린 위 "7.19. 민주회복∙민생살리기 제2차 범국민대회" 본 행사에서도, BH 공동대표는 “반 AI 전선을 만들어 똘똘 뭉쳐 투쟁해 나가자”라고 연설하고, BD 위원장은 “우리 노동자들은 쌍용차 공권력 투입과 미디어법 강행처리시 전면 파업에 돌입할 것이다”라고 연설을 하였으며, BI노조위원장은 “언론악밥 폐지를 위해 AI정권에 맞서 끝까지 투쟁할 것이다”라는 연설을 하고, AQ당 BB 의원은 “언론은 민주주의의 생명이다. 미디어법은 절대로 통과되어서는 안 된다"라고 연설을 하고, AZ 의원은 “현 정부는 서민정부를 죽이고 있다”라고 연설을 하였으며, AS당 BJ 의원은 “현 정부와 한 판 붙어서 이 지구상에서 영원히 격리시키자” 라고 연설을 하는 등 집회 참가자들은 현 정부의 주요 정책을 비판하고 현 정부를 상대로 투쟁하자는 취지의 정치적 발언을 하였고, 집회 참가자들도 “언론악법 철회하고 언론자유 보장하자! 비정규직 다 죽는다, 정규직화 시행하라! 혈세낭비 환경파괴 4대강 죽이기 중단하라! 시국선언 탄압 말고 표현의 자유 보장하라!"는 구호를 제창하였다.

The Defendants, through the website of the Gangwon Branch, led the participation of teachers and public officials in the lecture area on July 19, 200, and participated directly with the members of the Gangwon Branch in the “School and Public Officials Blue Blue Blue Blue Blue Blue Blue House”, which was held on July 19, 2009 at the Seoul District public forum, which was held on July 19, 2009.

As a result, the Defendants conspired with H executives and members, etc., and committed a collective act for purposes other than official duties as a public official.

Summary of Evidence

[209 Highest 293]

1. The defendant's partial statement in the first protocol of trial;

1. The legal statement of the witness BK;

1. Examination protocol of the accused by prosecution;

1. Statement of the police statement to BK;

1. A president of the accusation, on-site photographs, and notification of a astronomical shotosmpiosor, field-related photographs, one copy of the investigation report attached to the tent photographs installed while in motion, three copies of the tent photographs, four copies of the traffic photographs in front of the sentiments of the Gangwon-do Office of Education, and three copies of the latter part of the Office of Education of Gangwon-do;

1. An investigation report (report attached to a farm-fluoral land, a report attached to photographs, and a report attached to confirmation of sunrise and sunset time) 1 and a witness BK's statutory statement;

1. Examination protocol of the accused by prosecution;

1. Statement of the police statement to BK;

1. On-site photographs, on-site photographs, on-site photographs, stove photographs, stove photographs, each mountain content, on-site photographs of one person, certified copies of the real estate register (84, Do private-dong), and certified copies of cadastral map of the Do Office of Education;

1. Investigation report (to attach a ledger for managing telephone communications and public property of the relevant public officials);

1. The Defendants’ partial statements in the third protocol of trial;

1. Some of the statements made by the prosecution against the Defendants in the suspect interrogation protocol

1. Statement of prosecutorial statement concerning BL;

1. Each accusation;

1. Each report on investigation;

1. Investigation report (the report attached to the “H” materials submitted by the accusation agent)

1. Investigation report (to attach a copy of the statement prepared by the police who files an accusation against the Seoul Central Prosecutor's Accusation);

1. An investigation report (H’s accompanying minutes of the meeting of the Central Execution Committee of the third 360);

1. Investigative report (a report accompanied by a copy of the search and seizure data related to the Seoul Central District Prosecutors'H);

1. Investigation report (for teachers posted on the website at the H Gangwon District Office, assertion of legitimacy and attachment of the notice materials related to the Second Declaration to the Assembly).

1. Investigation report (Attachment of H news report material);

1. Investigation report (verification of the publication of the list of Signatories attached to the AG Articles and the Declarations);

1. The assembly and demonstration is related to the public assembly and demonstration of Gangwon-do, the assembly and demonstration of this case, materials related to the assembly and demonstration of this case, the assembly and demonstration of this case, and the assembly and demonstration of this case, additional materials to prove the accusation by the public prosecutor [209 high level160]

1. The Defendants’ partial statements in the third protocol of trial;

1. Some statements made by the Defendants in the suspect interrogation protocol of each prosecutor about the Defendants

1. Statement of prosecutorial statement concerning BL;

1. Each accusation;

1. Investigation report (to attach articles related to the 'the 'the 2nd 2nd pan-National Assembly' to the H);

1. Investigation report (to attach articles related to the No. 2 Declaration)

1. Investigation report (report on disclosure of the same image as the list of the Second Declarations)

1. Investigation report (Status of a person to be disciplined with the Presidential Decree);

1. Investigation report (to attach report materials of HH)

1. A criminal investigation report (a report accompanied by reference materials);

1. Investigation report (Attachment of materials related to seized articles of the H headquarters and Seoul Branch);

1. Investigation report (the report on confirmation of the fact that the subordinate teachers proposed to hold the assembly at the H Gangwon Branch on the side of the H headquarters);

1. Investigation report (report accompanied by the list of the organization level and executive branch office);

1. Investigative report (Attachment of Statement related to H’s Report)

Application of Statutes

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

A. Defendants: Articles 84 and 66(1) of the State Public Officials Act; Article 30 of the Criminal Act (a point of each collective act); and the choice of each fine

(b) Defendant A: Article 185 of the Criminal Act (a point of interference with general traffic), Article 110 subparag. 3, and Article 20(1) of the Building Act (a point of construction of an unauthorized temporary building), Article 23 subparag. 1, and the main sentence of Article 10 of the Assembly and Demonstration Act (a point of night demonstration), Article 97 subparag. 3, and Article 38(1) of the Road Act (a point of unauthorized occupation of a road), Articles 99 and 6(1) of the Public Property and Commodity Management Act (a point of use of an unauthorized public property), and each decision

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

Article 37 (former part of Criminal Act, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 (Defendants)

1. Detention in a workhouse;

Articles 70 and 69(2) of the Criminal Act

1. Order of provisional payment;

Judgment on the assertion by the Defendants and defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. Summary of the defendants and defense counsel's assertion

The facts of the facts charged in this case are acknowledged, but it should be interpreted that ① prohibiting collective acts for purposes other than official duties of a public official under Article 66(1) of the State Public Officials Act is prohibited, and ② The political neutrality obligation of a public official as prescribed by the State Public Officials Act refers to an act that mainly supports or oppose a specific political party and an act that is likely to affect an election. The contents of the Assembly and Demonstration Act do not constitute a violation of a political neutrality obligation, and ③ the contents of the Assembly and Demonstration do not constitute a violation of a political neutrality obligation inasmuch as the contents of the Assembly and Demonstration do not have any clear intent to influence an election, and ③ the contents of the Assembly and Demonstration do not directly go against the public interest. ④ The Assembly and Demonstration does not have any content contrary to the public interest, ④ the Assembly and Demonstration was signed within several hours, and announced outside working hours, and thus, it cannot be deemed that the Assembly and Demonstration failed to perform a duty of care as a teacher due to the act of a public official.

Therefore, each assembly of this case does not constitute a collective act for purposes other than public duties prohibited under Article 66 of the State Public Officials Act, and thus, the Defendants’ act should be acquitted.

2. Determination

A. The meaning of Article 66(1) of the State Public Officials Act

Article 66 (1) of the State Public Officials Act, the applicable provisions of this case, provides that "no public official shall engage in collective action for any labor campaign or other work other than public service." The prohibition of collective action of public officials for any work other than public service is defined as one of the obligations arising from a special status of public officials because collective action of public officials is likely to obstruct the overall public interest by representing the interests of the group of public officials." The "collective action for any work other than public service" in the above provision does not mean any collective action conducted by public officials for any work other than public service, but rather means any collective action conducted by public officials for any work other than public service, but it means the media, publication, assembly, and association freedom, the constitutional principle, the purport of the State Public Officials Act, the State Public Officials Act's duty to maintain good faith and duty to maintain good faith under the State Public Officials Act, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2003Do2960, Apr. 15, 2005; 2008Do305.).

Therefore, in determining whether a collective act is an act for activities other than public service, which is prohibited by Article 66 (1) of the State Public Officials Act, the criteria for public officials such as ① for the purpose against public interest, ② for the purpose against public interest, ② for the purpose of neglecting the duty of care, etc.

B. Whether each assembly or demonstration of this case was against public interest

1) Criteria for determining the purpose contrary to the public interest

It is difficult to uniformly explain what the purpose is contrary to the public interest, and it is necessary to determine whether there is substantial infringement of the public interest depending on the case. However, the legislators enacted a statute that limits the freedom and rights of the people or imposes certain obligations on the people on the grounds that it is necessary for the public interest. A group of public officials committed a violation of such statute, even if a group of public officials did not directly violate such statute or directly violate such provision, if it actually avoided such restriction or obligation, and if it results in a violation of such provision, it is a substantial infringement of the public interest that the provision intends to protect, and it is an act

In accordance with Article 56 of the State Public Officials Act, the duty to observe the laws and regulations and to perform duties faithfully shall also be supported.

헌법은 제21조에서 모든 국민에 대하여 언론·출판·집회·결사의 자유, 즉 표현의 자유를 보장하고 있고 여기에는 국가권력의 간섭이나 통제를 받지 아니하고 자유롭게 정치적 의사를 형성 발표할 수 있는 정치적 표현의 자유도 포함된다. 그러나 다른 기본권과 마찬가지로 정치적 표현의 자유도 절대적인 것은 아니고 헌법 제37조 제2항에 따라 국가안전보장 질서유지 또는 공공복리를 위하여 필요한 경우 법률로써 제한할 수 있음은 명백하다. 헌법 제7조 제1항은 "공무원은 국민전체에 대한 봉사자이며, 국민에 대하여 책임을 진다."고 규정함으로써 공무원은 국민전체의 이익을 위해 봉사해야 하는 입장에 있으며 일부의 국민이나 특정 정파 혹은 정당의 이익을 위해 봉사하는 입장이 아님을 분명히 밝히면서, 같은 조 제2항에서 “공무원의 신분과 정치적 중립성은 법률이 정하는 바에 의하여 보장된다”고 규정하여 공무원에 대한 정치적 중립성을 요구하고 있는 바, 이러한 규정들은 공무원이 집권세력의 논공행상의 제물이 되는 엽관 제도를 지양하고, 정권교체에 따른 국가작용의 중단과 혼란을 예방하며 일관성 있는 공무수행의 독자성 및 영속성을 유지하기 위하여 헌법과 법률로써 공무원의 신분을 보장하려는 것으로, 그러한 보장이 있음으로 해서 모든 공무원은 어떤 특정 정당이나 특정 상급자를 위하여 충성하는 것이 아니라 국민전체에 대한 공복으로서 법에 따라 그 소임을 다할 수 있게 되는 것이며, 이는 당해 공무원의 권리나 이익의 보호에 그치지 않고 국가통치 차원에서의 정치적 안정의 유지에 기여할 수 있기 때문이다(헌법재판소 1992. 11. 12.자 91헌가2 전원재판부 결정 참조). 공무원에 대한 위와 같은 헌법의 요청에 의해 국가공무원법은 제65조에서 공무원이 정당이나 정치단체의 결성에 관여하거나 가입하는 행위, 선거에서 특정 정당 또는 특정인을 지지 또는 반대하기 위한 행위 등을 금지하고 있고, 공직선거법 제9조 제1항은 공무원은 선거에 대한 부당한 영향력의 행사 기타 선거결과에 영향을 미치는 행위를 금지하고 있으며, 공무원의 노동조합 설립 및 운영 등에 관한 법률 제4조는 공무원의 노동조합과 그 조합원의 정치활동을 금지하는 등 공무원에 대한 정치적 의사표현의 자유를 제한하는 법률 규정들이 제정되었다. 이와 같은 공무원에 대한 정치적 중립성의 요청은 “교육의 자주성·전문성·정 치적 중립성 및 대학의 자율성은 법률이 정하는 바에 의하여 보장된다”고 규정한 헌법 제31조 제4항에 의해 교육 분야에서 종사하는 교육공무원에게까지 제도적으로 보장되는 바(헌법재판소 2004. 3. 25.자 2001헌마710 전원재판부 결정), “교육은 교육 본래의 목적에 따라 그 기능을 다하도록 운영되어야 하며, 정치적·파당적 또는 개인적 편견을 전파하기 위한 방편으로 이용되어서는 아니된다”고 규정한 교육기본법 제6조 제1 항, “교원은 특정한 정당이나 정파를 지지하거나 반대하기 위하여 학생을 지도하거나 선동하여서는 아니 된다”라고 규정한 같은 법 제14조 제4항 등이 교원에 대하여 정치적 의사표현의 자유를 포함한 정치적 활동의 자유를 일정한 범위 내에서 제한하고 있고, 특히 구 교원의 노동조합 설립 및 운영 등에 관한 법률(2010. 3. 17. 법률 제10132호로 개정되기 전의 것, 이하 '교원노조법'이라 한다) 제3조는 “교원의 노동조합은 일체의 정치활동을 하여서는 아니된다”고 규정하여 교원 노동조합의 정치적 활동의 자유를 엄격하게 제한하고 있다. 이러한 규정들은 교육의 자주성·전문성 정치적 중립성의 보장이라는 공익을 실현할 목적으로 어린이와 청소년에 대한 초·중등교육을 담당하는 직무의 특수성을 가진 교원 및 교원의 노동조합에 대한 정치적 의사표현의 자유를 포함하는 정치적 활동의 자유를 제한하고 있는 것인바, 결국 이러한 규정을 위반하는 행위는 공익에 반하는 행위로 볼 수밖에 없고, 공무원인 교원이 그와 같은 규정에 위반되는 집단적 행위를 하였다면 이는 결국 공익에 반하는 목적을 위한 집단행위에 해당한다 할 것이다.

2. Whether each assembly or demonstration violated Article 3 of the Act on the Assistance to Teachers’ Unions

(1) Article 3 of the Act on the Assistance to Teachers and Fisheries provides that “no labor union shall engage in any political activity.” However, in light of the principle of political neutrality of public officials and education prescribed in the Constitution and the legislative purport of the Act on the Protection of Workers and the Framework Act on Education, etc., it seems that a public official is obliged to keep more strict political neutrality in performing his/her duties because of the unique nature of his/her duties as a public official and a teacher taking charge of elementary and secondary education for children and juveniles beyond those of the Act on the Protection of Workers and the Act on the Protection of Workers and the Act on the Protection of Workers and the Protection of Workers and the Protection of Workers and the Protection of Workers and the Protection of Workers and the Protection of Workers and the Protection of Workers and the Protection of Workers and the Protection of Workers and the Protection of Workers and the Protection of Workers and the Protection of Workers and the Protection of Workers and the Protection of Workers and the Protection of Workers and the Protection of Workers and the Protection of Workers and the Protection of Workers and the Protection of Workers and the Protection of Workers and the Protection of Workers and the Protection of Workers and the Act.

나) 그 다음 이 사건 각 시국선언이 교원 노동조합에 의하여 이루어 진 것인지,에 관하여 살펴보면, 앞에서 든 증거들에 의하면, 이 사건 각 시국선언은 H 중앙집행 위원회(본부 임원들인 위원장, 수석부위원장, 부위원장, 정책실장, 사무처장, 편집실장 및 전국 시·도지부장 등으로 구성되어 있다. 전원이 참석하여 전원 만장일치로 의사를 결정한다)에서 시국선언을 결의하고, H 본부에서 시국선언문을 작성하여 전국 16개 지부로 송부한 후, 각 지부별로 H 전임자들이 '시국선언문 서명 안내'를 홈페이지에 게시하고, 이메일 팩스 등의 방법으로 각 분회에 시국선언문 및 서명용지를 송부한 후, 그 회신을 취합하였으며, H 본부는 위와 같이 각 지부별로 취합된 서명을 전체적으로 다시 취합하여 기자회견 형식으로 시국선언문을 발표한 후, 인터넷 홈페이지에 시국선언문 및 서명자 명단을 게시한 사실을 인정할 수 있는 바, 위 인정사실 및 위 증거들에 의하여 인정되는 다음과 같은 사정, 즉 이 사건 시국선언은 개별 교원들이 주체가 되어 자발적으로 시작된 것이 아니라 H 집행부가 기획하여 미리 그 문안을 작성한 후 그 산하 조직을 통하여 조합원들을 독려함으로써 매우 짧은 기간 내에 이루어진 점, 이 사건 시국선언에 참여한 교사 중 상당수가 H 소속 조합원인데다가 그 발표자, 발표수단, 게재매체 등이 모두 H와 관련된 점 등에 비추어보면, 비록 이 사건 각 시국선언이 H의 명의가 아니라 '6월 민주항쟁의 소중한 가치를 기리는 P 외 16,171명의 교사' 또는 P 외 28,634명의 교사' 명의로 발표되었다 하더라도 이는 H가 그 조합원들을 포함한 교원들에게 법률에 의하여 금지된 정치적 의사를 집단적으로 표현하도록 유도함으로써 교원노조법 제3조의 규정을 우회적으로 회피하기 위한 것에 불과할 뿐 실질적으로는 H가 그 조직·기구를 이용하여 H 활동의 일환으로서 한 행위에 해당한다고 봄이 상당하다. 다) 그 다음 시국선언문이 발표가 정치활동에 해당하는지 여부에 관하여 살펴보면, 이는 그 시국선언의 목적과 경위, 동기, 구체적 표현 내용 등에 비추어 판단하여야 할 것인바(대법원 2006. 5. 12. 선고 2005도4513 판결 등 참조), 앞에서 든 증거들에 의하여 인정되는 다음과 같은 사정, 즉 ① 이 사건 각 시국선언문에는 다양한 집단의 정치적 이해관계가 첨예하게 대립되어 있는 미디어법 개정과 4대강 개발사업(이른바 한반도 대운하) 추진 등 정부 정책, 촛불집회와 피디수첩 관계자에 대한 수사, 용산화재 참사의 발생과 AJ 전 대통령의 서거 등 특정사건에 관한 일방적 견해가 표출되어 있고, 현 정권을 비민주적인 군사정권에 비유하면서 이 사건 각 시국선언이 그에 대항하는 진정한 민주적 저항정신의 발로라고 주장하는 내용이 주류를 이루고 있으며, 일부 교육정책에 관한 부분(교육복지의 확대, 학교운영의 민주화, 학생인권의 보장 등)이 포함되어 있지만 주된 논지는 아니어서, 근무조건이나 교육환경의 개선 등 교원 노동조합 및 그 조합원의 경제적·사회적 지위 향상으로 한정된 교원 노동조합의 설립 취지와 활동 범위를 명백하게 벗어난 정치적 의사의 집단적 표현에 해당하는 것으로 보이는 점, ② 이 사건 각 시국선언은 H 집행부의 기획, 조직 및 독려에 의하여 매우 짧은 기간 내에 이루어진 것으로, H 집행부는 AJ 전 대통령의 서거(2009. 5. 23.) 이후 정부의 각종 정책에 대하여 첨예한 정파 간의 대립이 이어지는 시점에서 이 사건 각 시국선언을 함으로써 정부를 압박하고 H가 반대하는 정책의 결정 및 집행을 저지하려고 하였던 것으로 보이는 점, ③ 이 사건 각 시국선언으로 말미암아 당시 시국상황에 관한 인식에 있어 사회적 이해관계가 다른 국민들 사이에 갈등과 혼란을 유발하고, 공무원인 교원의 정치적 중립성에 대한 국민의 신뢰, 특히 교사의 정치적 중립에 대한 학생 및 학부모의 신뢰에 상당히 부정적인 영향을 미쳤음을 부정할 수 없는 점, 교사들의 발언과 행동이 학생들에게 미치는 광범위한 파급효과와 오늘날 매스컴이나 인터넷이 발휘하는 전파력 등을 감안하면, 교사들이 학생들에게 지식의 전수라는 간접적인 방식을 통한 정치교육이 아니라 집단적으로 정부를 비난하는 내용의 시국성명을 발표하는 행위는 설령 학교수업 외에서 이루어진 것이라 하더라도 학생들로 하여금 편향적인 시각을 갖게 하는 결과를 초래할 위험성이 매우 크고 정치적으로 중립적인 교사들로부터 교육을 받고자 하는 통상적인 학부모들의 요구와도 상충되는 점 등을 종합하면, 이 사건 각 시국선언은 교원 노동조합인 H가 법이 허용하는 테두리를 넘어 특정 정치세력 또는 그 정책에 대한 비판과 반대의 의사표시를 담고 있는 정치적 의사를 표현하여 교원노조법 제3조에서 금지하고 있는 정치활동을 한 것일 뿐만 아니라, 실질적으로도 공익에 반하는 목적을 위한 것으로 보기에 충분하다.다. 직무전념의무를 해태하는 등의 영향을 가져오는 행위인지 여부

As seen above, insofar as the Defendants committed an act contrary to the public interest in violation of the Teachers’ Labor Assistance Act, the Defendants were deemed to have committed an act that may affect the Defendants’ failure to perform their duties and neglecting their duty of care.

In light of the above legal principles, the Defendants’ act of violating the Assembly and Demonstration Act’s duty of care or duty of care or duty of care or duty of care or duty of care or duty of care or duty of care or duty of care or duty of care or duty of care or duty of care or duty of care or duty of care or duty of care or duty of care or duty of care or duty of care or duty of care or duty of care or duty of care or duty of care or duty of care or duty of care or duty of care or duty of care or duty of care or duty of care (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 200Du16786, Jun. 23, 2009). The Defendants’ act of care or duty of care or duty of care or duty of care or duty of care or duty of care or duty of care or duty of care or duty of care or duty of care or duty of care or duty of care or duty of care or duty of care or duty of care or duty of care or duty of care or duty of care or duty of care or duty of labor union.

D. Conclusion

Thus, each act of the assembly and demonstration of this case constitutes a collective act prohibited by the State Public Officials Act, which affects the duty of care for the purpose of violating the public interest. Thus, the defendants and defense counsel's above assertion is without merit.

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.

Judge Kim Jong-soo