Defendant 1 and 21 others

Landscape Constitution et al.

Attorneys Kim Jong-young et al.

Defendant 1 is punished by imprisonment with prison labor for four years, by imprisonment for not less than three years, and by imprisonment for not more than ten years, and by imprisonment with prison labor for not more than 10, 16, 18, 6, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, 19 (Defendant 18 of the Supreme Court Decision), 21 (Defendant 20 of the Supreme Court Decision), and 22 (Defendant 21 of the Supreme Court Decision).

Defendant 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17, 192, 16, 192, 167, 197, 167, 18, 20, and 166 days of detention prior to the pronouncement of this judgment, shall be included in each of the above punishment against Defendant 22.

However, from the date this judgment became final and conclusive, with respect to the defendants 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 15, 17, 19, and 21 for four years, and with respect to the defendants 10, 16, 18, and 20 for three years, each of the above punishments shall be suspended.

Of the facts charged in the instant case, Defendant 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, 21, and 22’s violation of the Punishment of Violence, etc. Act (a collective, deadly weapons, etc.) against Nonindicted 11 of the victim is acquitted.

[Status of Defendant]

Defendant 1 is the head of the branch office of the △△△ Two Motor Vehicle Branch (hereinafter referred to as the “FU”), the secretary general, the head of the organization dispute, Defendant 3, Defendant 4, Defendant 5, Defendant 6, Defendant 7, Defendant 8, and Defendant 9, the head of the culture and sports department, Defendant 10, Defendant 11, the head of the labor safety and health office, Defendant 12, Defendant 12, the head of the policy planning office, Defendant 13, Defendant 14, the head of the education and publicity office, Defendant 15, Defendant 16, the head of the planning office, Defendant 17, the representative of Defendant 18, Defendant 19, the head of the group branch office, Defendant 21, Defendant 22, the head of the maintenance branch office, and the head of the policy planning office.

【Basic Facts】

1. Progress in restructuring of both motor vehicles (hereinafter referred to as " Both motor vehicles");

The two vehicles start up the rehabilitation procedure with the Seoul Central District Court on January 9, 2009, because they were unable to pay the face value of KRW 93.2 billion due to the decline in sales due to the pay-in and economic crisis in 2008, the loss in derivatives transactions, and the weakening in competitiveness due to the failure of research and development investment since the early 2000s. Since early 2008, they were merely 7.4 billion won in cash for early 2009 and were merely 4.4 billion won in cash. The Seoul Central District Court made an application to start the rehabilitation procedure with the Seoul Central District Court on February 6, 2009. The Seoul Central District Court, along with the decision to start the rehabilitation procedure for the two vehicles on February 6, 2009, expressed that "the organization and business status of the two vehicles were completely re-written from each new Do, thereby reflecting the objective inspection and profitability and implementing the rehabilitation guidelines accurately."

As a result, on April 8, 2009, a pair of automobiles were prepared and announced a self-rescue plan with the content that the restructuring of 2,646 persons who are workers 7,177 and 37% of the total amount of 2,50 billion won, including the new development investment funds, are to take over 2,50 billion won. On May 6, 2009, Nonindicted 12, an inspector, submitted a self-rescue plan with the purport that "the continuous corporate value of a pair of automobiles as of the commencement date of rehabilitation" was KRW 1.327.57 billion, while the liquidation value was KRW 9,385.95 billion, the liquidation value was above KRW 38.984 billion, but the continuous corporate value was considerably higher than the liquidation value of 7,177.37%, and there was no possibility of a new rehabilitation of the Seoul District Court."

In accordance with the above self-rescue plan, on April 16, 2009, both automobiles submitted a written dismissal plan to dismiss 2,405 persons as of June 8, 2009, taking into comprehensive account the disciplinary action, continuous service, evaluation, attitude of work, number of dependent family members, etc. to the office of the Bupyeong-gu Regional Labor and Labor Office around May 8, 2009, when they received a desired retirement application from workers, and then submitted a written dismissal plan to implement restructuring by receiving applications for voluntary retirement, separation, etc. for several times thereafter.

2. Power to engage in the strike and a strike;

(a) Progress of the strike;

In the process of the above rehabilitation procedure for two motor vehicles, the company's co-manager of two motor vehicles is required to guarantee the total employment of one person against the promotion of restructuring in accordance with the guidelines of the Seoul Central District Court. On April 3, 2009, on the 9th day of the same month, the company held a temporary representative meeting to convene a general meeting for the purpose of "labor bargaining and crushing" for the purpose of "labor bargaining and crushing", and on the 13th day of the same month and the 14th day of the same month, the company made a resolution for the strike with 5,025 members among the 5,151 members, 4,328 members (84.02%). After that, on April 24, 2009, the company continued to hold a 20-year-old-old-old-out-out-out-out-out-out-out-out-out-out-out-out-out-out-out-out-out-out-out-out-out-out-out-out-out-out-out-out-out-out-out-out-out-out-out-out-out-out-out-out-out-out-out-out-out-out-out-out-out-out-out-out-out-out-out-out-.

In the process, on April 10, 2009, the Trade Union and Labor Relations Commission applied for mediation of labor disputes to the National Labor Relations Commission, but on the 20th of the same month, the National Labor Relations Commission received administrative guidance from the National Labor Relations Commission that the issue of restructuring is not subject to labor disputes but recommended that the labor conditions be actively and faithfully negotiated between labor and management. On the 23th of the same month, the Trade Union and Labor Relations Commission applied for mediation of labor disputes again to the National Labor Relations Commission, but on May 4, 2009, it was decided to suspend mediation on the ground that it is impossible to present the mediation proposal due to a significant difference between labor and management

(b) Power of strike;

On April 9, 2009, the executive branch of a two-wheeled motor vehicle trade union consisting of 34 members in total, including 34 members in the chapter chief, the chief site chief, the secretary general, 7 members in charge, and 23 members in charge. On April 9, 2009, the unions of two-wheeled motor vehicles decided to make a public announcement of convening a general meeting to vote for and against an industrial action through a temporary conference of delegates, and on April 3, 2009, delegated the organization of the Central Dispute Mediation Committee (hereinafter referred to as the "Central Dispute Mediation Committee") in which 45 members, including 34 members in the above executive branch and 7 representatives in the office branch of the Changwon branch and the representatives in the office branch of the Changwon branch and one representative, respectively, participate in a decision on the schedule and method of the future strike by subrogation

Therefore, Defendant 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 19, 21, and 22 led to a series of strike operations as above, by executing the strike plan, together with the remaining central dispute subrogation members, as the executive officers or central dispute subrogation members of the construction department of the two motor vehicles.

【Criminal Facts】

1. Interference with business due to partial strike, etc. prior to occupancy or departure;

On April 23, 2009, through a central dispute subrogation meeting, the two parties decided to mobilize the members to a meeting to withdraw the layoff of two vehicles held in front of the Central Government Complex. The central dispute members including Defendant 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 19, 21, 22, including Defendant 1, 13, 14, 15, 19, 21, and 22, such as encouraging the members to participate in the meeting and checking the number of participating members, and from 3:30 to 17:30,00,00 members belonging to the Pyeongtaek Factory assembly and the 4:1,000 members belonging to the assembly team and two members of the two two groups held in front of the Government Complex to prevent the victims from participating in the meeting from causing 97,700,000 won or more of the damages caused by their own power.

In addition, Defendant 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 19, 21, and 22 interfered with the business of the manufacture and manufacture of a pair of motor vehicles from April 24, 2009 to May 25, 2009 by force in collusion with other central dispute subrogation members in collusion with Defendant 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 6, 7, 8, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 19, 21, and 22, as shown in the attached list 1, 209, until May 22, 2009, when both motor vehicles were suspended from business on the same day.

2. An individual act of violence and an act of violence in the original factory of a pair of vehicles prior to the occupation and departure of a vessel.

(a) Defendants 2, 3, 11, and 12: Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint property damage, etc.);

On February 27, 2009, at around 07:10, the Defendants demanded the Nonindicted 76, the head of the emergency planning team of both vehicles, to move to another place on the ground that the mobile fac case installed therein obstructs the assembly. However, Nonindicted 76 refused the Defendants’ demand due to the safety and security problems, and gave a desire to the Defendant 2, who had set up his demand. At around 08:40 on the same day, the Defendants moved PC 1, monitoring 1, chemical 2, auxiliary 2, assistant 1, and chair 1st century used by Nonindicted 76 team leader at the emergency planning team office on the first floor of this Sub-Section.

As a result, the Defendants jointly damaged the property amounting to KRW 1,250,000 at the market price of the victim's assertion, such as the computer owned by both parties of the victim's automobile, in collaboration with ten members of the non-indicted 263 et al.

(b) Defendant 15: Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint property damage, etc.);

At around 09:30 on April 29, 2009, the Defendant followed the following methods: “The head of the personnel team obtains the consent of the union members in accordance with what person is, why the person is the head of the personnel team, why the person is the head of the personnel team, and why he is the head of the personnel team.” On the other hand, the Defendant was accompanied by Nonindicted 6 and Nonindicted 8 of the head of the policy department, such as the book, the Nowon-gu and the head of the planning department, etc., in relation to “the consent of the court report of the employee rehabilitation claim.”

As a result, the Defendant, in collaboration with Nonindicted 6 and 8, damaged the property equivalent to KRW 1,447,00 at the market price of the victim’s assertion, such as the books owned by the two vehicles.

(c) Defendant 4: Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a group, deadly weapons, etc. and damage, etc. thereof);

피고인은 2009. 5. 6. 21:45경 쌍용자동차 평택공장 조립 3라인 2층 중앙통로에서, 조립 3팀 야간조 운영과 관련하여 공소외 8과 함께 “지금 당장 퇴근을 하고 자리를 비워라”라고 소리를 지르며 위험한 물건인 쇠 파이프를 휘둘러 천장 형광등 2개를 파손시키고, 캐비닛을 발로 걷어찼다.

As a result, the Defendant carried with Nonindicted 8 a hack pipe, which is a dangerous object, destroyed the market price, such as two ball lights owned by both parties.

(d) Defendants 2, 10, and 22: Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint assault);

On May 6, 2009, from around 20:50 to 21:30 on the same day, the Defendants found three teams for the assembly of two vehicles from around 20:0 to Nonindicted 20 on May 6, 2009, and read, “When she wishes to operate a string, turn off, and drop down,” Defendant 10 was sprinked with the victim Nonindicted 21, who is in charge of production 21, and Defendant 22 was sprinked with the bring of the bring of the bring of the victim Nonindicted 22, who is the head of the production sector, and Defendant 2 was spicked by Defendant 2.”

Accordingly, the Defendants committed violence against the victims jointly with Nonindicted 20.

(e) Defendant 1 and 22: Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a violation of the Act on the Punishment of Violences, etc.;

On May 8, 2009, at around 11:30, the Defendants issued a strike guidelines from 14:00 to 14:30 of the same day on the same day through a meeting of representatives of two motor vehicles, and from 14:37 of the same day to 14:30 of the same day, the Defendants issued a anniversary stone for executive officers of China located in front of the main body of the two motor vehicles in front of the main body of the motor vehicles.

As a result, the Defendants damaged a memorial stone for a Chinese officer in the U.S. market price, which is the ownership of a pair of motor vehicles for victims using dangerous goods.

(f) Defendant 1, 5, 6, 7, and 22: Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a group, deadly weapons, etc. causing damage, etc.)

From around 14:00 on May 8, 2009, the Defendants participated in front of the main office of the two cars in order to raise an resistance against the layoff. At around 14:40 on the same day, at around 14:40, the Defendants entered the office of Nonindicted 19, a joint management on the fiveth floor of this Sub-Section, including Nonindicted 23 of the Safety Department, Nonindicted 23 of the non-regular branch office, and Nonindicted 24 of the non-regular branch office, into the office of Nonindicted 19, a joint management on the fiveth floor of this Sub-section, and laid the office

As a result, the Defendants damaged the office house of the victim, such as the book and franter, which is the ownership of the two vehicles owned by the victim by multiple force with approximately 200 members, to have the amount of KRW 5,820,000 as the market price of the victim's assertion.

(g) Defendant 6, 10: Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint property damage, etc.);

On May 11, 2009, between the 11:20 on the same day and 11:30 on the same day, the Defendants sought a set of team office of the two vehicles Pyeongtaek Factory with Nonindicted 25. Defendant 6, the vice head of the first team, Nonindicted 26, and the 10 employees in charge of the management office, including Nonindicted 26, called “Isn't't't say Isn't shes the members of the association to retire, Is his books and equipment, and she fl's books and equipment, and fl'ssssssssssss, etc., fl'sssssssss, fl'sssss, and fl'ssss, etc., fl'sssss, and fl's,

As a result, the Defendants jointly with Nonindicted 25 damaged the unclaimed property in the market price, such as a two-wheeled computer owned by the victim.

(h) Defendant 3, 4, 5, 7, and 8: Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (collective, deadly weapons, etc.)

On May 11, 2009, at around 18:45, Defendant 4 and 7 entered the third team office for the assembly of two vehicles, along with Nonindicted 20, 27, and 6, and asked Nonindicted 28, who is the third team leader of the assembly, to “from May 6 to May 8, 200, it was rejected,” and Nonindicted 20 ordered Nonindicted 20 to “the head of the assembly to put up the status of night work assistance for three days.” Defendant 4 and 7, together with Nonindicted 27 and 6, ordered Defendant 4 and 7 to “the head of the department in charge of the production,” and demanded Nonindicted 21 to get off the office with the pipe, etc., and presented the status of attendance to Nonindicted 4, 27, and 6, etc., as seen above, it was rejected, and accordingly, Defendant 4, 7, and the head of the production department, upon Nonindicted 20’s order.

In addition, around 19:50 on the same day, Defendant 4, 7, and 8 entered a painting 2 team office with Nonindicted 29, Nonindicted 30, and Nonindicted 31, including Nonindicted 20 on the same day, and Nonindicted 20 entered the painting 2 team office with Nonindicted 31, the Ministry of Education head, and Nonindicted 4, 7, and 8 directed Defendant 20 to “whether he will take charge of root management”, and Defendant 4, 7, and 8, together with Nonindicted 29, 30, and 31.

On the same day, around 20:30 on the same day, Defendant 3, 4, 5, 7, and 8 entered Nonindicted 22’s office in the production sector, along with Nonindicted 20, 31, etc., and Nonindicted 20 instructed Nonindicted 20 to “Divers” when Nonindicted 22 refused the request through telephone communications, and Defendant 3, 4, 5, 7, and 8 sent an office with Nonindicted 31, etc., such as a book.

Accordingly, the Defendants, in collusion with Nonindicted 20, 6, and 31, destroyed that the amount equivalent to KRW 10,598,50 in the market price of the victim’s assertion for repair of books, computers, and other office fixtures, which are dangerous goods, were carried by using a pipe in collusion with Nonindicted 20, 6, and 31.

(i) Defendant 2 and 6: Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a collective action, a deadly weapon, etc.) and the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a violation of any collective action, any deadly weapon, etc.);

On May 11, 2009, the Defendants entered the studs factory office with Nonindicted 6, 13, etc., and called Nonindicted 6’s vice head and employees as “find and find” and set the wall surface of the pipe factory with the studs. Defendant 6 photographed Nonindicted 33, 34, and 35 photographs of non-members waiting in the factory, and Defendant 2 should come well from the studs. The manager was find with the pipe floor, and the manager was find with Nonindicted 6’s studs, and 36 studs in charge of production of the 2nd floor, and immediately 6th floor of the 2nd floor, Defendant 6nds of the pipe, Defendant 6nds of the 2nd floor, Defendant 2nd of the 2nd floor, Defendant 6nd of the 2nd floor, Defendant 6nd of the 2nd floor, and 3nd of the 3nd of the 2nd floor.

As a result, the Defendants, in collusion with Nonindicted 6 and 13, destroyed the office fixtures, which are the owners of two-way vehicles, and the office fixtures of the market price, such as computer, etc., and damaged the victims about 21 days of medical treatment.

(j) Defendant 6, 7, or 9: Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint property damage, etc.);

On May 21, 2009, at around 14:55, the Defendants entered the 1st team of the two cars Pyeongtaek Factory with Nonindicted 37, and kept a chemical part of the goods in the office with approximately 6m rail from the 2nd floor office, and 4, monitoring8, 2, 1, 4, 4, 4, 3, 3, 1, 3, 1, 1, 1, 3, and 1, etc., from the 2nd office to the 1st floor, and Nonindicted 8 was driving a vehicle with 77t to complete the computer, etc.

Accordingly, the Defendants, in collaboration with Nonindicted 37 and 8, damaged the market price of 4,295,00 won at the victim’s assertion, such as the computer owned by both parties to the victim.

(k) Defendant 6 and 16: Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint property damage, etc.);

At around 16:30 on May 21, 2009, the Defendants found the list of desired retirees with Nonindicted 37,38 at the office of Pyeongtaek-si painting 2 team office of two cars. In addition, the Defendants added 4 computers used for business purposes, 1 table of desired retirees, 2 table of the second floor glass, 4 table of the company, 4 table of office chair, and 2 table of exaggeration books.

Accordingly, the Defendants, in collaboration with Nonindicted 37 and 38, damaged the property equivalent to KRW 3,138,000 at the market price of the victim’s assertion, such as the computer owned by both parties to the victim.

(l) Defendant 5, 9, and 15: Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (collectives, deadly weapons, etc.) and violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (injury by a group, deadly weapons, etc.);

On May 2, 2009, between 22:05 and 22:35 on May 22, 2009, Defendant 5 sought the quality1 team office of the third floor manufacturing storage unit of the two cars, together with Nonindicted 8. Defendant 5: “The receipt of desired retirees and the list of the relevant persons shall be deemed to be a taxable calculation of tax base,” and Nonindicted 8 shall have three computer monitoring units used in the office as a person for meeting purpose.

The Defendants continued to find with Non-Indicted 8 at the production and management team, logistics operation team, logistics planning team, and material procurement team office of the two cars from 22:35 to 22:45 on the same day. Defendant 15 stated that “The managers remain in the company because there are many members of the company until late at night, and the manager will not leave the party at present,” and Defendant 9 stated that “the vice head of the victim Non-Indicted 7 was “the soon string in the office room,” and the victim Non-Indicted 7 told the victim Non-Indicted 7 to see that “the pipe was filled up and walked one pipe, and walked with the victim’s et al. on one occasion, and the victim’s et al. al. on one occasion, the victim’s et al. al., 1, 1,2,1,1,2,1,1,2,1,2,1,1,2,1,1,2,1,1,1,1,2, and2 of the above 8.

As a result, the Defendants, in collusion with Nonindicted 8, damaged the property equivalent to KRW 2,843,00 at the market price of the victim’s assertion of two vehicles, such as computers owned by the victim company, by carrying a dangerous pipe, and inflicted injury on the victim Nonindicted 7, such as salt, tension, etc. in need of medical treatment for about 14 days.

(m) Defendant 15: Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act;

On May 23, 2009, the Defendant: (a) around 16:15 on May 23, 2009; (b) around 16:15, when Nonindicted 41, the victim Nonindicted 41, who was the victim Nonindicted 41, who was the victim Nonindicted 41, did not walk the victim; (c) Defendant 15 and other union members, prevented the victim from approaching the management staff of the two automobiles; and (d) Nonindicted 8 took the pocket book possessed by the victim from Nonindicted 40, the vice-chairperson 39 and the vice-chairperson 7, and the vice-chairperson of the labor-management cooperation team from Nonindicted 40.

As a result, Defendant 15 jointly with Non-Indicted 8 and Non-Indicted 7, 8 of his name-free wing team, including Non-Indicted 8, led the victim to an inspection of both sides requiring medical treatment for about 21 days.

(n) Defendant 6, 20: Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint property damage, etc.);

On June 9, 2009, between 14:10 on the same day and 14:50 on the same day, the Defendants found 2nd floor of the Changwon Factory, 2nd floor business management team office and conference room, and Nonindicted 42 at Nonindicted 6’s office of the regular manager, together with Nonindicted 6. On the ground that the Defendants sent 10 persons, including the president, Nonindicted 43, who is the executive officer of the Changwon branch of two vehicles, and the president, Nonindicted 43, on the ground of the failure to engage in the strike, sent a letter of public notice demanding the removal of 10 persons from the members, but the private side did not receive their own demand. Defendant 20 was on the ground that Defendant 6 walked the actual wall of the Games twice, Defendant 6 was on the front of the computer, and 6 was on the upper floor of the computer.

As a result, the Defendants jointly damaged the property amounting to 3,141,000 won at the market price of the victim's assertion, such as the computer owned by both parties to the victim's car.

3. Refusal to eviction and interference with business by means of occupation and departure; and

(a) Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a)

As above, since May 26, 2009, when two cars stand in full, the victim's two cars reported a lock-out to the competent authority and publicly announced it on May 31, 2009, and at the same time, upon notification of the lock-out report to the two cars, the victim's two cars demanded the removal of all the persons in Pyeongtaek-si factory, but the two cars continued to stand in full, but the victim's company again notified on June 20, 2009 that the two cars will break out and move out to the factory.

Nevertheless, from around 08:30 on May 31, 2009 to August 6, 200, the Defendants continued to comply with the victim company's demand for withdrawal by multiple force, while blocking the entrance and exit of containers, etc. in a two-wheeled car stack factory together with approximately 900 occupying farmers and leaving the entrance of the two vehicles, which are dangerous objects, with a chain pipe, flame disease, chemical chlostrosis, chemical emitting machine, knive gun for voltages, etc.

(b) Interference with business;

The Defendants conspired with approximately 90 occupying farmers, and thereby interfered with the management of Pyeongtaek factory facilities of the victim company by force by making it impossible for both the victims to manage factory facilities by the above means during the above period.

4. An act of violence at the time of occupation or departure.

(a) Public offering;

On May 22, 2009, Defendant 1, 3, and 12 held the “third meeting of the tactical Planning Team” with Nonindicted 1, the Director of △△△ Policy Bureau, Nonindicted 44, the Director of the Organization of △△△ branch, the Director of the General Affairs Office of △△△ branch, and Nonindicted 1, who are in charge of the organization of △△△ branch, and Nonindicted 1, and resolved on the following: the 1st phase period; the 2nd phase period period period period period period period period period period period period period period period period period period period period period period period period period period period period period period period period period period period period period period period period period period period period period period period period period period period period period period period period period period period period period period

Of the resolution of the 3rd conference of the tactical Planning Team, the aforementioned "PPP Planning (PPP)" set forth the "PPP 1-Class 2 EM as effective division of roles inside the strike, the preparation of tactical arrangement and goods necessary therefor in preparation for the possibility of the injection of public authority, the "precluding and direction-setting" such as the extension of the reorganization problem of two motor vehicles, the active spread of the core issues of all labor circles, including △△△△, the preparation of strike programs such as the organization of the strike, the formation of the team, the team, the team, the team, and the team, the organization of the combat team, the organization of the team, the team, the team, and the team, the preparation of the basic tactical in preparation for the injection of public authority, the preparation for the sharing of basic tactical in preparation for the input of public authority, the "major plan and tactical rules" such as the "PPP 200," the "PPPP 200," the "PPP 3.

On May 22, 2009, the strike force, including Defendant 1, etc., including the Defendant 1, etc., gathered on the basis of the resolution of the "third conference of the tactical planning team" following the organization and combat unit organization of the participants in the strike, the organization of the participants in the strike, and education and tactical training in preparation for input such as government power, etc., the production, storage and distribution of weapons, base and response methods for each time before and after entry such as combat units, organization of combat units, organization of the third conference, central dispute subrogation meetings, etc., including the organization of the participants in the strike, and the establishment of base and response methods for each time before and after entry, such as combat units, public power, etc.

The main agents, such as Defendant 1, etc., are in charge of assembly 3 and 4 teams in the vicinity of 209, 1 assembly teams and 4 teams in the vicinity of buses, 4 teams in the vicinity of dormitories, 2 teams in the vicinity of Young Village, 2 teams in the vicinity of parking lots in the direction, 4 seconds in the direction of maintenance and 3 boxes in the direction of the participants in the 2009 and in charge of the 1stm of container assembly, the participants in the 2nd of the 2nd of the 2nd of the 1st of the 2nd of the 2nd of the 2nd of the 2nd of the 2nd of the 2nd of the 2nd of the 2nd of the 2nd of the 2nd of the 2nd of the 2nd of the 2nd of the 3nd of the 2nd of the 2nd of the 2nd of the 2nd of the 2nd of the 2nd of the 2nd of the 2nd of the 2nd of the 2nd of the 200.

○ Defendant 1, etc., and the main strike force, such as Defendant 1, etc., made up for more than 1,00 shot pipes, divided them into the participants in the occupation and strike, such as public authority, or each base boundary service, made a new gun that can emit a V, etc. to the participants in the occupation and strike, and made it possible to do so at the base of the above secondary defense line. Defendant 1 had the representative of the press team, Nonindicted 14, who is the representative of the press team, produce a multiple-explosion by using sub-gas, etc., and Defendant 3 prevented the participants in the occupation and strike from entering into the Pyeongtaek factory using the aforementioned illegal goods, etc.

As of May 25, 2009, from June 2, 2009 to July 15, 2009, the strike force, including Defendant 1, etc. divided the participants in the strike into 14:0 of the strike goods creation, from June 2, 2009 to July 15, 2009, 20 times the tactical training was conducted 20 times to ensure that the participants in the strike can gather in each base, such as sprink, sprink, sprink, and fireworks, around 11:0 of July 16, 2009; the base maintenance and combat goods production around 10:00 of July 17, 2009; the combat goods production at around 10:0 of the combat goods and combat goods; and the method of use at around 14:10 of the battle goods and pipes, etc. at around the same date; and the method of use against the operation of the public authority.

Around June 26, 2009, Defendant 1, etc., and other employees of the two vehicles enter the main office, etc. of the participants in the occupation-frequency industry by excavating the first defensive line, and leaving the main office, etc., Defendant 1 who imitated the military organization into the Chief of Staff (or the chief of Staff), Defendant 3 as the fleet commander (or the chief of staff) and the person responsible for each place of work as the fleet commander, the unit commander as the fleet commander, and the unit commander as the unit commander. The "total command unit" is installed in front of the painting 2 factory rooftop, and the "on-way command unit" stationed by Defendant 3 as the chief commander is installed in the rooftop of the painting 2 factory, and the "on-way command unit" is basically installed in response to the entry of the employees of both vehicles and the public authorities.

Accordingly, Defendant 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, 21, and 22, under the direction system and direction as seen above, directed and managed union members participating in the strike in accordance with the direction system and direction method as well as the other central dispute subrogation members, and the officers and employees of the two vehicles or police officers have entered the Pyeongtaek 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, 21, and 22 were recruited to defend to the maximum extent possible by using weapons prepared as above, etc., and in fact, the two officers and employees of the two vehicles and the police forces of the two vehicles, as seen below.

B. Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a group, deadly weapon, etc.) on June 26, 2009

When the crisis of the bankruptcy of the two vehicles due to the prolongedization of the occupation-frequency industry above, about 3,00 officers and employees of the two vehicles desiring to engage in normal operation, attempted to enter into the Pyeongtaek-type factory of the two vehicles by going through the normal operation without any armed riot on June 26, 2009, and the members of the two companies, who were in the occupation-type flab, were using the flabing pipe, pipe pipe, fladr, shot gun, etc. with the flabing flab, thereby preventing them from entering the Pyeongtaek-type factory of the officers and employees.

On June 26, 2009, at around 15:00, Defendant 17, the captain of the vessel-based factory, around 15:00, in accordance with the direction of Defendant 17, the captain of the vessel-based factory, Defendant 18 and Nonindicted 47, the captain of the vessel-based vessel, including Defendant 18 and Nonindicted 47, have replaced the number of officers and employees of the two vehicles coming to the place. In addition, Defendant 18 displayed the hack pipe, which is an object dangerous to the employees of the two vehicles in his name in his name, and Nonindicted 47 left the hack pipe, which is an object dangerous to the head of Nonindicted 48 (Nam, 31 years old) and left arms. Moreover, the participants in the vessel-based strike, including the rest of the vessel-based fleet, including the officers and employees of the two vehicles, launched the pipe through a string string and a string string, etc., and launched the string and string.

As a result, Defendant 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, and 22 and other central dispute subrogation members, who launch a shot gun and display a shot pipe, and the members of the other central dispute subrogation, in collusion with Defendant 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 19, 21, and 21, and 23 of the victim as indicated in the [Attachment] list 3 using a pipe, shot gun, knife, knife, knife, knife, and knife, respectively.

C. Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act relating to the possession of a ship on June 27, 2009 (a collective injury, deadly weapons, etc.)

As mentioned in the above B, approximately 3,00 executives and employees of two vehicles entered in the two vehicles Pyeongtaek Factory: (a) secure the main pipes; (b) install the next export waiting room; and (c) use them as the rest place for the officers and employees. Defendant 1, etc. instructed the members participating in the occupation strike between June 27, 2009 and 22:40 on the same day to take advantage of the string pipe, pipe pipe, powder cancellation fire, and shot gun, etc., out of the Pyeongtaek Factory.

Accordingly, according to Defendant 22’s instructions, the members of the cooperative, Nonindicted 52, 53, 54, 55, and 2 members of the cooperative, who were armed with the pipe and the powder cancellation fire around June 27, 2009, including Defendant 10 and the members of the cooperative, Nonindicted 56, 57, and approximately 50 members of the cooperative, who were on board a large number of steel scrap loaded 6 vehicles on board, francing the said tent where the officers and employees was easy. The members of the cooperative, who were in charge of the powder cancellation, launched a pipe to launch the fire to the officers and employees of the factory, and the members of the cooperative, who were in the brush pipe, launched the pipe to the employees and employees of the cooperative, who were on the rooftop in the 2 plant, launched the franc, using a new flap gun.

Accordingly, Defendant 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, 21, and 22 of the remaining Central Dispute Subrogation Committee members, Nonindicted 52, 53, 54, 55 and 22 of the non-indicted 52, 57, 56, 57, 8, 8, 6, 7, 8, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, 19, 21, and 22 of the non-indicted 52, 53, 54, 555, and 16, 16, 46, 26, 3, and 48, respectively, of the victims of assault and injury to the left.

D. Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a group, deadly weapon, etc.) on June 27, 2009

Around 14:00 on June 27, 2009, the president of the 3 factory assembly of two cars:4 members, who are the members of the two teams of the two cars in name, are placed in the middle pipe, and the victim non-indicted 58 (Nam, 35) who are the employees belonging to the two teams of the two cars preservation team of the two cars in name, opened a new gun to the victim non-indicted 59 (Nam, 48) who belongs to the victim non-indicted 59 (ma, 48 years old) who belongs to the first team of logistics operation in which the members in name were located. In addition, the members in the name omitted launched a new gun to the victim non-indicted 59 (ma, 48 years old) who belongs to the first team of logistics operation in the middle of each building, the three teams near the frame, the vicinity of the frame, the welfare Dong, the vicinity of the MIP warehouse, the vicinity of the guard room, and the officers and employees in the Do parking lot near the Do.

Accordingly, Defendant 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, 21 and 22, in collusion with Defendant 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, 21, and 22, in collusion with members of the other central dispute subrogation, who launch a new gun, and on the name of the former who launched the gun, who launched dangerous articles by multiple force, are injured respectively by 20 victims, and assaulted by 3 victims, respectively.

(e) Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (the arrest of groups, deadly weapons, etc.) on June 27, 2009 and injury resulting from special arrest;

Around 16:00 on June 27, 2009, Non-Indicted 60 of the members of a pair of motor vehicles (hereinafter “Non-Indicted 60”), under the direction of Non-Indicted 70 of the members of the final prosecutor’s office, “I she is the same as the employees of the final prosecutor’s office.” The 70 members of the non-Indicted 60, including Non-Indicted 60, discovered the victim Non-Indicted 10 (ma, 44 years old), who was working at the expense of Non-Indicted 10 (ma, 44 years old), while driving away away, the hack pipe, one of which was dangerous articles, was used to get back on the right side of the victim’s right side, and prevented the victim from walking. After that, Non-Indicted 60, 16, Defendant 16, and the members of the association, who were arrested and sealed the victim from the next place.

As a result, Defendant 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, 21, and 22 conspired with other disputing members, 70 association members, 70 association members, 17, 19, 21, and 22 arrested the victim by carrying out a dangerous pipe, which is a multiple force, and thereby, inflicted injury on the victim, such as the left-hand and the down blood species, which need to be treated for about three weeks.

F. Injury resulting from special obstruction of performance of official duties or special obstruction of performance of official duties on July 22, 2009

At around 18:30 on July 22, 2009, approximately 100 participants in the occupation-frequency industry, including Defendant 1, attacked by using chemical spawn, spawn, spawn, and spawn pipes, etc., which are the police officers belonging to the Korean Gyeonggi Provincial Police Agency, for the purpose of preventing criminal acts, such as violence, etc. on the inside of the spawn located in the spawn site of two vehicles.

이로써 피고인 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, 21, 22는 나머지 중앙쟁대위 위원들 및 약 100여 명의 점거농성자들과 공모공동하여 다중의 위력으로써 위험한 물건인 쇠 파이프와 화염병을 휴대하여 위와 같이 경계근무 중이던 경찰관들을 폭행함으로써 순경인 피해자 공소외 61에게 약 3주간의 치료를 요하는 손목, 손, 몸통, 엉덩이 및 다리의 심재성 2도 화상을 가한 것을 비롯하여 별지 범죄일람표 6 기재와 같이 경찰공무원인 피해자 21명의 범죄예방 및 진압에 관한 정당한 직무집행을 방해하고, 이로 인하여 경찰공무원 13명에게 각각 상해를 입게 하였다(공소장에는 조합원 공소외 62가 점거농성자들이 던진 화염병에 맞아 온몸에 불이 붙은 채 바닥에서 뒹굴고 있는 경기지방경찰청 6기동대 소속 순경 공소외 61을 보고 다른 점거농성자들 4-5명과 함께 쇠파이프를 휘둘러 공소외 61을 때렸다는 사실도 포함되어 있으나, 검사가 제출한 증거만으로는 당시 공소외 62가 공소외 61을 직접 쇠 파이프로 폭행하였다는 사실을 인정하기에 부족하고, 달리 위와 같은 사실을 인정할 만한 증거가 없으므로, 위 부분은 인정되는 범죄사실에서 제외하기로 한다).

G. Special obstruction of performance of official duties or special obstruction of performance of official duties on July 24, 2009

From around 09:40 on July 24, 2009, approximately 30 members of both automobile painting 2 factory rooftop, approximately 50 members of parts design 50, approximately 10 members of parts design 50, approximately 10 members of the association on their names in front of the painting 1 factory, approximately 10 members of the association on their names in front of the sewage treatment plant, approximately 10 members of the association on their names in the vicinity of the MIP warehouse, and approximately 30 members of the assembly factory, on the rooftop 10:0 of the same day, from the 2nd factory rooftop to the police. At around 10:0 of the same day, the members of the association on their names, from the 2nd 2nd Gap 2nd 2nd dong Police Agency, who were in front of the 4W parking lot, launched a new gun to the victim non-indicted 63 (Nam, 37 years old) who was in front of the 4W parking lot.

As a result, Defendant 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, 21, and 22, jointly with members of the central dispute subrogation committee and members of the association on their names, and jointly with the other members of the association, who are dangerous by multiple force, suffered injury to one police officer, as shown in attached Table 7 of the crime list.

H. Injury resulting from the obstruction of performance of special duties or special obstruction of performance of official duties on August 4, 2009

At around 13:00 on August 4, 2009, occupied farmers laid down or laid down a pipe, which is a dangerous object, against the police officers in the name of non-indicted 64, etc. working in the Seoul Special Police Agency, who want to enter the said rooftop, and emitted a gun and administered a flame disease.

As a result, Defendant 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, 21, and 22 in collusion with the above occupied farmers, and the remaining members of the Central Dispute Subrogation Committee suffered from damage to Non-Indicted 64, who performed legitimate execution of duties for the normalization of the management of the facilities of the two motor vehicles by using the spacks, spacks, spacks, spacks, and spacks, which are dangerous objects by multiple force, and by using the spacks, knife, knife, knife, knife, knife, and knife, as listed in the attached list of crimes.

(i) Injury resulting from the obstruction of performance of special official duties or special obstruction of performance of official duties on August 5, 2009

On August 5, 2009 from around 05:00 to around 08:30 the same day, the occupied farmers, who had approximately KRW 100, laid or laid down a hack pipe, which is a police officer belonging to the Gyeonggi Provincial Police Agency, and Nonindicted 65 and Nonindicted 15, a sloped object against police officers, who want to enter the said rooftop, on the 2nd factory rooftop and the string factory rooftop, etc. in the Tyeong-si Factory, in which they want to enter the said rooftop, were defended against the above police officers by holding a string gun, launching a flame gun, throwing a chrops, throwing a brick, throwing a brick, and throwing down a brick, and Nonindicted 66, etc. of the said police officers, while leaving or leaving a hack pipe, launchinging a knife, launching a chemical gun, throwing a stone, throwing a stone, and defending the members of the said police officers.

As a result, Defendant 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, 21, and 22 conspired with and jointly with the other central dispute subrogation members, approximately 10 persons, 10 persons, and 65 persons, who performed legitimate duties for the normalization of the facility management of the two vehicles by using the pipe pipe, flive flive spons, and flick disease, etc., which are dangerous objects by multiple force, have them perform legitimate duties for the normalization of the facility management of the two vehicles, as shown in attached Table 9 of Crimes List of Crimes, and thereby interfere with the legitimate performance of duties concerning the crime prevention and suppression of police officials, thereby causing injury to police officials, respectively.

(j) Violation of the Punishment, etc. of Crops Act;

Defendant 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, 21, and 22, in collusion with the members participating in the fact-finding business using the remaining central dispute subrogation members, non-indicted 45, and chemical diseases, and with the members participating in the fact-finding business, they manufactured, stored, and used chemical diseases, such as the one mentioned in paragraphs (2) and (4) of the criminal facts.

1. Defendants’ respective or partial statements

1. Each legal statement of the witness, Nonindicted 67, 26, 2, 68, 69, 70, 72, 71, 72, 10, and 10

1. Results of on-site inspections by this court;

1. Each prosecutor's interrogation protocol against the Defendants

1. Copy of the protocol of interrogation of Nonindicted 6 by the police

1. Each written statement of the police record on Nonindicted 72, 22, 73, 74, 67, 75, 71, 76, 77, 78, 79, 28, 80, 26, 81, 82, 32, 69, 83, 48, 84, 84, 85, 86, 87, 41, 88, 40, 89, 90, and 91;

1. Each protocol of statement of the police against Nonindicted 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 3, 61, 108, 109, 110, 63, 111, 112, 112, 4, 5, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 123, 65, and 15

1. Non-indicted 124, 125, 126, 127, 49, 128, 130, 131, 132, 17, 133, 134, 135, 48, 56, 68, 137, 138, 51, 21, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 150, 151, 152, 153, 154, 156, 157, 156, 157, 156, 157, 1586, 168, 167, 16616, 167, 167, 167, 197

1. Each written statement of Nonindicted 36 and 186

1. A written statement prepared by Nonindicted 187, 188, 189, 190, 191, 192, 64, 193, 194, 195, 196, 197, 198, 200, 201, 202, 203, 204, 204, 205, 206, 207, 208, 209, 210, 211, 212, 213, 214, 215, 216, 217, 218, 219, 220, 221, 2222;

1. Non-indicted 23, 86, 224, 225, 226, 227, 228, 229, 135, 230, 231, 232, 233, 234, 7, 235, 236, 237, 238, 238, 256, 239, 240, 241, 242, 243, 2444, 245, 242, 172, 158, 246, 247, 237, 249, 250, 251, 254, 256, 2565, 258, 258, 265, 265, 258, 251, 265, 365, 2565, 297

1. Statement of seizure of each police;

1. Each investigation report (the guidelines for a dispute subrogation campaign and the contents of press reports, the two-time organization map of △ two-dimensional motor vehicles branching in △ Parties, the submission of the decision of the National Labor Relations Commission, the field of property damage and damage, etc., the major status of restructuring, the organization and documentary evidence of the labor damage prevention team, the current status of composition of the union members of both motor vehicles, the evidence of offenses, and documentary evidence);

1. Each drilling (the site photographs of two vehicles, the current status of collection at the site of two vehicles-to-door factory, documentary evidence photographs, multi-fluorrative agents, the shooting distance of LPG flames and destructive experiment photographs);

1. Each injury diagnosis report and opinion, and copies of the injury diagnosis report and opinion;

1. Details of sending text messages, CDs, evidence, photographs, and CDs;

1. Results of the restructuring of pair of automobiles, expenses incurred in damage to equipment, affairs related to ordinary meetings and educational strike, reports on in-house violence, reports on in-house violence, each central dispute subrogation guide and emergency dispute subrogation guide, business liaison (five-month work guidance), major schedule of the Bilateral sub-chapters, requests for the protection of facilities, records of the vehicle's first team situation, records of the previous and temporary termination report, cases concerning notification of change of the institute subject to lock-out, cases concerning notification of suspension of business interference and temporary termination of lock-out, cases concerning notification of change of the institute subject to lock-out, records on the suspension of business and removal request, reports on the size of human resources adjustment, requests for consultation on human resources adjustment, requests for consultation on labor-management adjustment, special cases for consultation on human resources adjustment, two-party mediation methods, records of non-members retirement and off-to-land conversion, two-party mediation methods, records of the previous and temporary termination of the lock-out, records on the change of the institute subject to lock-out, and information on the results of the two-party consultation;

1. Current status of damage to each property, cost of damage to equipment, loss incurred due to the strike, amount of loss incurred due to the strike, damage to equipment and facilities, and estimates;

1. Each photograph;

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

A. Defendants

(1) In response to the eviction of each group, deadly weapon, etc.: Articles 3(1) and 2(1)1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act and Article 319 of the Criminal Act

(2) Each interference with business: Articles 314(1) and 30 of the Criminal Act

B. Defendant 1, 4, 5, 8

(1) The act of destroying and damaging property, such as a group, deadly weapon: Articles 3(1), 2(1)1, 366, and 30 of the Criminal Act

(2) Each group, deadly weapon, etc.: Articles 3(1), 2(1)3, 257(1), and 30 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act;

(3) The act of assaulting a group, deadly weapon, etc.: Articles 3(1), 2(1)1, 260(1), and 30 of the Criminal Act

(4) Arrest of each group, deadly weapon, etc.: Articles 3(1) and 2(1)2 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, Articles 276(1) and 30 of the Criminal Act

(5) The injury caused by special arrest: the first sentence of Article 281(1), Articles 278 and 30 of the Criminal Act

(6) The injury caused by each special obstruction of performance of official duties: Articles 144(2) and (1), 136(1), and 30 of the Criminal Act

(7) Each special obstruction of performance of official duties: Articles 144(1), 136(1), and 30 of the Criminal Act

(8) The manufacture and storage of each chlorate disease: Article 4(1) of the Act on the Punishment, etc. of Use, etc., of chlorate Disease; Article 30 of the Criminal Act

(9) Use of each flame disease: Article 3(1) of the Act on the Punishment, etc. of Use, etc., of Infection Diseases and Article 30 of the Criminal Act

C. Defendant 2

(1) The act of destroying and damaging common property: Articles 2(2) and 2(1)1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, Article 366 of the Criminal Act

(2) The point of each joint assault: Articles 2(2) and 2(1)1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act and Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act

(3) Damage and damage to property, such as a group, deadly weapon: Articles 3(1) and 2(1)1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, Articles 366 and 30 of the Criminal Act

(4) Each group, deadly weapon, etc.: Articles 3(1), 2(1)3, 257(1), and 30 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act;

(5) The act of assaulting a group, deadly weapon, etc.: Articles 3(1), 2(1)1, 260(1), and 30 of the Criminal Act

(6) Arrest of a group, deadly weapon, etc.: Articles 3(1) and 2(1)2 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, Articles 276(1) and 30 of the Criminal Act

(7) Injury caused by special arrest: the first sentence of Article 281(1), Articles 278 and 30 of the Criminal Act

(8) The injury caused by each special obstruction of performance of official duties: Articles 144(2) and (1), 136(1), and 30 of the Criminal Act

(9) Each special obstruction of performance of official duties: Articles 144(1), 136(1), and 30 of the Criminal Act

(10) The manufacture and storage of each chlorate disease: Article 4(1) of the Act on the Punishment, etc. of Use, etc., of chlorate Disease; Article 30 of the Criminal Act

(11) Use of each flame disease: Article 3(1) of the Act on the Punishment of the Use, etc. of Infection Diseases and Article 30 of the Criminal Act

D. Defendant 3, 6, 7, 9

(1) The act of destroying and damaging each common property: Article 2(2) and 2(1)1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, Article 366 of the Criminal Act

(2) Damage and damage to property, such as group, deadly weapons: Articles 3(1), 2(1)1, 366, and 30 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, Articles 3(1), 2(1)1, and 30 of the Criminal Act

(3) Each group, deadly weapon, etc.: Articles 3(1), 2(1)3, 257(1), and 30 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act;

(4) The act of assaulting a group, deadly weapon, etc.: Articles 3(1), 2(1)1, 260(1), and 30 of the Criminal Act

(5) Arrest of each group, deadly weapon, etc.: Articles 3(1) and 2(1)2 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, Articles 276(1) and 30 of the Criminal Act

(6) The injury caused by special arrest: the first sentence of Article 281(1), Articles 278 and 30 of the Criminal Act

(7) The injury caused by each special obstruction of performance of official duties: Articles 144(2) and (1), 136(1), and 30 of the Criminal Act

(8) Each special obstruction of performance of official duties: Articles 144(1), 136(1), and 30 of the Criminal Act

(9) The manufacture and storage of each chlorate disease: Article 4(1) of the Act on the Punishment, etc. of Use, etc., of chlorate Disease; Article 30 of the Criminal Act

(10) Use of each flame disease: Article 3(1) of the Act on the Punishment of the Use, etc. of Infection Diseases and Article 30 of the Criminal Act

E. Defendant 10

(1) The point of each joint assault: Articles 2(2) and 2(1)1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act and Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act

(2) The point of destruction and damage of common property: Articles 2(2) and 2(1)1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, Article 366 of the Criminal Act

(3) Each group, deadly weapon, etc.: Articles 3(1), 2(1)3, 257(1), and 30 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act;

(4) The possession of violence, such as a group, deadly weapon: Articles 3(1) and 2(1)1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, Articles 260(1) and 30 of the Criminal Act

F. Defendant 11, 12, 16

(1) The act of destroying and damaging each common property: Article 2(2) and 2(1)1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, Article 366 of the Criminal Act

(2) Each group, deadly weapon, etc.: Articles 3(1), 2(1)3, 257(1), and 30 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act;

(3) The act of assaulting a group, deadly weapon, etc.: Articles 3(1), 2(1)1, 260(1), and 30 of the Criminal Act

(4) Arrest of each group, deadly weapon, etc.: Articles 3(1) and 2(1)2 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, Articles 276(1) and 30 of the Criminal Act

(5) The injury caused by special arrest: the first sentence of Article 281(1), Articles 278 and 30 of the Criminal Act

(6) The injury caused by each special obstruction of performance of official duties: Articles 144(2) and (1), 136(1), and 30 of the Criminal Act

(7) Each special obstruction of performance of official duties: Articles 144(1), 136(1), and 30 of the Criminal Act

(8) The manufacture and storage of each chlorate disease: Article 4(1) of the Act on the Punishment, etc. of Use, etc., of chlorate Disease; Article 30 of the Criminal Act

(9) Use of each flame disease: Article 3(1) of the Act on the Punishment, etc. of Use, etc., of Infection Diseases and Article 30 of the Criminal Act

G. Defendant 13, 14, 17, 19, 21

(1) The act of inflicting an injury on each group, deadly weapon, etc.: Articles 3(1), 2(1)3, 257(1), and 30 of the Criminal Act

(2) The act of assaulting a group, deadly weapon, etc.: Articles 3(1), 2(1)1, 260(1), and 30 of the Criminal Act

(3) Arrest of each group, deadly weapon, etc.: Articles 3(1) and 2(1)2 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, Articles 276(1) and 30 of the Criminal Act

(4) The injury caused by special arrest: the first sentence of Article 281(1), Articles 278 and 30 of the Criminal Act

(5) The injury caused by each special obstruction of performance of official duties: Articles 144(2) and (1), 136(1), and 30 of the Criminal Act

(6) Each special obstruction of performance of official duties: Articles 144(1), 136(1), and 30 of the Criminal Act

(7) The manufacture and storage of each chlorate disease: Article 4(1) of the Act on the Punishment, etc. of Use, etc., of chlorate Disease; Article 30 of the Criminal Act

(8) Use of each flame disease: Article 3(1) of the Act on the Punishment, etc. of Use, etc., of Infection Diseases and Article 30 of the Criminal Act

H. Defendant 15

(1) The act of destroying and damaging common property: Articles 2(2) and 2(1)1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, Article 366 of the Criminal Act

(2) Damage and damage to property, such as a group, deadly weapon: Articles 3(1), 2(1)1, 366 and 30 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act;

(3) Each group, deadly weapon, etc.: Articles 3(1), 2(1)3, 257(1), and 30 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act;

(4) The point of joint injury: Article 2(2) and 2(1)3 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act and Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act

(5) The act of assaulting a group, deadly weapon, etc.: Articles 3(1), 2(1)1, 260(1), and 30 of the Criminal Act

(6) Arrest of a group, deadly weapon, etc.: Articles 3(1) and 2(1)2 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, Articles 276(1) and 30 of the Criminal Act

(7) Injury caused by special arrest: the first sentence of Article 281(1), Articles 278 and 30 of the Criminal Act

(8) The injury caused by each special obstruction of performance of official duties: Articles 144(2) and (1), 136(1), and 30 of the Criminal Act

(9) Each special obstruction of performance of official duties: Articles 144(1), 136(1), and 30 of the Criminal Act

(10) The manufacture and storage of each chlorate disease: Article 4(1) of the Act on the Punishment, etc. of Use, etc., of chlorate Disease; Article 30 of the Criminal Act

(11) Use of each flame disease: Article 3(1) of the Act on the Punishment of the Use, etc. of Infection Diseases and Article 30 of the Criminal Act

A. Defendant 18

(1) The act of inflicting an injury on each group, deadly weapon, etc.: Articles 3(1), 2(1)3, 257(1), and 30 of the Criminal Act

(2) The act of assaulting a group, deadly weapon, etc.: Articles 3(1), 2(1)1, 260(1), and 30 of the Criminal Act

(j) Defendant 20

Article 2(2) and (1)1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act and Article 366 of the Criminal Act

(k) Defendant 22

(1) The point of each joint assault: Articles 2(2) and 2(1)1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act and Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act

(2) Damage and damage to property, such as group, deadly weapons: Articles 3(1), 2(1)1, 366, and 30 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, Articles 3(1), 2(1)1, and 30 of the Criminal Act

(3) Each group, deadly weapon, etc.: Articles 3(1), 2(1)3, 257(1), and 30 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act;

(4) The act of assaulting a group, deadly weapon, etc.: Articles 3(1), 2(1)1, 260(1), and 30 of the Criminal Act

(5) Arrest of each group, deadly weapon, etc.: Articles 3(1) and 2(1)2 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, Articles 276(1) and 30 of the Criminal Act

(6) The injury caused by special arrest: the first sentence of Article 281(1), Articles 278 and 30 of the Criminal Act

(7) The injury caused by each special obstruction of performance of official duties: Articles 144(2) and (1), 136(1), and 30 of the Criminal Act

(8) Each special obstruction of performance of official duties: Articles 144(1), 136(1), and 30 of the Criminal Act

(9) The manufacture and storage of each chlorate disease: Article 4(1) of the Act on the Punishment, etc. of Use, etc., of chlorate Disease; Article 30 of the Criminal Act

(10) Use of each flame disease: Article 3(1) of the Act on the Punishment of the Use, etc. of Infection Diseases and Article 30 of the Criminal Act

1. Commercial competition;

Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act [the punishment prescribed for a crime of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (the arrest of a group, deadly weapon, etc.) and special arrest against the rest of defendants except for defendants 10, 18, and 20] Articles 40 and 50 of the same Act

1. Selection of punishment;

Each crime of interference with business, violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint violence), violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint violence), violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint injury), violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, and violation of the Punishment of Madern Disease, etc., choice of imprisonment

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

The punishment provided for in the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act [1] Articles 38(1)2, and 50 [1] Articles 37(1)(2) of the Criminal Act for the remaining Defendants except Defendant 10, 18, and 20, the punishment provided for in the special obstruction of performance of official duties against the victim non-indicted 15 who is the most serious criminal situation; 2) Defendant 10 shall be sentenced to the punishment provided for in the violation of the Punishment of Violence, etc. Act (a collective, deadly weapons, etc.) against the victim non-indicted 16 who is the most serious criminal situation; 3 Defendant 18 shall be sentenced to the punishment provided for in the crime of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. (a collective, deadly weapons, etc.) against the victim non-indicted 17 who is the most severe criminal punishment with respect to the defendant 20

1. Discretionary mitigation;

Defendant 10, 16, and 18: Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act (each of the following favorable circumstances among the reasons for sentencing)

1. Inclusion of days of detention in detention;

Article 57 of the Criminal Code

1. Suspension of execution;

Defendant 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21 of the Criminal Act

1. Summary of the assertion

A. As to interference with each business under paragraph (1) of the crime

Each industrial action listed in Paragraph (1) of the same Article (hereinafter referred to as the "industrial action in this case") is not aimed at opposing the restructuring of both parties' automobiles, but for the withdrawal of layoffs made as part of the restructuring, as well as for the purpose of the industrial action in this case including the demand for improvement of working conditions such as wage increase, reduction of working hours, and change in work form, and therefore justified in its purpose. In addition, the industrial action in this case is justified in the procedure of the industrial action in this case, since the industrial action in this case was conducted not only by the vote of union members prior to the industrial action in this case, but also by the administrative guidance given by the National Labor Relations Commission to recommend sincere negotiations from the National Labor Relations Commission by applying for mediation of the industrial dispute to the National Labor Relations Commission. Accordingly, the illegality of the industrial action in this case is dismissed as a justifiable act

B. As to the injury of each of the crimes, violence, arrest and bodily injury resulting from special arrest, special obstruction of performance of official duties, and injury resulting from special obstruction of official duties

Criminal facts as stated in paragraph (3) of the same criminal facts were committed by some members of the above Defendants 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, 21, 22 and 3, 17, 19, 19, 21, and 22 of the same criminal facts committed during the period of a strike (hereinafter “the strike of this case”). In particular, it cannot be deemed that the above Defendants had the intent to jointly process each of the above criminal facts or have functional control over each of the above crimes through essential contributions, and thus, Defendant 16, 4, 16, 17, 17, 15, 17, 17, 15, 17, 17, 27, 19, 17, 15, 17, 25, 17, 2, 10.

2. Determination

A. As to the obstruction of business due to the industrial action of this case

(1) If multiple workers’ refusal to provide labor, such as collectively leaving a workplace or absence from work under mutual communication, thereby causing damage to the normal operation of business, such as the employer’s production and sale, etc., unless it is a legitimate industrial action under labor-related Acts and subordinate statutes, and the illegality of such act is avoided, it should be deemed that the crime of interference with business constitutes an act of obstructing another person’s business by force (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 90Do2771, Apr. 23, 191).

In order to become a legitimate act of workers' industrial action under the Criminal Act, the first person shall be eligible to be the subject of collective bargaining; second, the purpose of the industrial action shall be to coordinate the autonomous bargaining between the labor and the management to improve working conditions; third, the industrial action shall commence in accordance with the procedures prescribed by Acts and subordinate statutes, such as the consent and decision of the union members, unless there are special circumstances; fourth, the means and method should be in harmony with the employer's property rights, as well as the exercise of violence (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2003Do687, Nov. 13, 2003). Thus, the purpose of the industrial action is to create an autonomous bargaining between the labor and the management to improve working conditions. Thus, it means that the requirements to be achieved by the industrial action can not be a matter of collective bargaining, unless there are special circumstances such as the change of working conditions or the status of the management organization to be implemented by the industrial action, and thus, the industrial action can not be justified as a matter of principle.

On the other hand, in a case where there are many purposes pursuing an industrial action, and some of them are not justifiable, the legitimacy of the industrial action should be determined by the legitimacy of the main purpose or genuine purpose. In a case where it is recognized that the industrial action would not have been conducted if the industrial action had not been conducted for the reason of the illegal demand, the entire industrial action shall not have the legitimacy (see Supreme Court Decision 2001Do3380, Dec. 26, 2003, etc.).

(2) The defendants' assertion that the industrial action was conducted on January 9, 200 by requesting the Seoul Central District Court to commence rehabilitation proceedings on February 6, 200, and that the industrial action was conducted on two separate occasions for the purpose of restructuring 7,17% of workers and 2,50 billion won for the purpose of resolving the above crisis of two different automobiles, and that the industrial action was conducted on April 8, 2009, which was not conducted for the purpose of industrial action 2,50 billion won for new development financing. This assertion that the industrial action was not conducted for the purpose of industrial action 4,00,000 won for the purpose of industrial action. This assertion that the industrial action was conducted for the purpose of industrial action 5,00,000 won and that there was no further need to maintain the industrial action as a new industrial action. Therefore, it is difficult to say that the industrial action was conducted for the purpose of industrial action 1,500,000 won by the Central Labor Relations Commission.

B. As to the injury of each person during the strike period of this case and the injury of special arrest, the injury of special obstruction of performance of official duties, and the injury of special obstruction of official duties

(1) A co-principal under Article 30 of the Criminal Act is established by satisfying the subjective and objective requirements, such as the commission of a crime through a functional control based on the intent of co-processing and the common intent. Even in cases where part of the conspiracys have not been carried out by directly sharing part of the constituent elements, if it is acknowledged that a functional control through an essential contribution to a crime exists rather than a mere conspiracy, but rather a functional control exists through an essential contribution to the crime, the so-called crime cannot be exempted (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Do1623, Dec. 22, 2006). In this case, in light of all the circumstances such as the means and manner of the crime, the number of participants and their inclinations, time and characteristics of the place of the crime, possibility of contact with others in the process of the crime, response to the crime, etc., even if there was no possibility that the conspiracys would have been carried out by the conspiracys to achieve the objective of the crime, it should not be deemed that there was a reasonable possibility of any other crime, as well-founded or other possible.

However, insofar as the conspiracy or conspiracy constitutes an essential part of the "fact that is a crime" in the conspiracy of co-principals, it shall be specific and detailed as possible, and it shall be subject to strict proof in light of the characteristics of the crime. However, in exceptional cases where it is inevitable in view of the nature of the crime, it cannot be deemed illegal on the ground that part of the facts charged was recorded somewhat generally within the extent that it does not go against the purport that the Criminal Procedure Act requires the specification of the facts charged (see Supreme Court Decision 2002Do6103, Jan. 24, 2003). Therefore, the decision of the conspiracy or conspiracy does not need to make detailed decisions, and it is difficult to find that the conspiracy of opinion was established, and it is difficult to say that the unity of opinion was established (see Supreme Court Decision 2006Do3631, Aug. 25, 2006).

(2) 돌이켜 이 사건에 관하여 보건대, 앞서 거시한 증거들로부터 알 수 있는 다음과 같은 사정, 즉 쌍용자동차 노조는 창원지회 소속 조합원 약 560명과 정비지회 소속 조합원 약 280명을 포함한 약 5,200명의 조합원으로 구성된 노동조합으로서 조합원 전원으로 구성되는 총회에 갈음해 각종 의사결정을 하기 위하여 조합원 50여 명을 단위로 1명씩 선출되는 대의원 대회를 두고 있고, 대의원 대회로부터의 수임사항의 처리 및 조합의 업무집행과 운영을 담당하는 집행기관으로서 임원인 지부장, 수석부지부장, 부지부장, 사무국장과 조직쟁의실, 정책기획실, 노동안전실, 후생복지실, 교육선전실, 대외협력실, 재정총무실의 7개 각 실로 구성된 집행부를 두고 있는데, 이 사건 파업 당시 피고인 1은 지부장, 피고인 22는 수석부지부장, 피고인 2는 사무국장, 피고인 3은 조직쟁의실장, 피고인 12는 정책기획실장, 피고인 11은 후생복지실장, 피고인 13은 교육선전실장, 피고인 14는 재정총무실장, 피고인 5, 6, 7, 8, 9는 조직쟁의실 소속의 조직쟁의부장, 피고인 4는 조직쟁의실 소속의 문화체육부장, 피고인 15는 정책기획실 소속의 기획부장이라는 집행부 간부로서의 직책을 담당하고 있었고, 피고인 19는 쌍용자동차 노조 창원지회장, 피고인 21은 쌍용자동차 노조 정비지회장으로서 각 쌍용자동차 노조 산하 기관의 간부였으며, 피고인 16은 조립3팀 대의원대표였던 공소외 9가 2009. 5. 20.경 쌍용자동차 평택공장을 나가 이 사건 파업에 불참하게 된 이후부터 소속 대의원들을 대표하여 중앙쟁대위 회의에 참석하고 그 회의내용 및 집행부의 지침을 소속 조합원들에게 전달하는 등 실질적으로 대의원대표의 역할을 수행하였고, 피고인 17도 점거파업기간 중 개최된 집회의 선두에 서서 집회를 주도하는 선봉대 대장의 지위에서 피고인 16과 마찬가지로 중앙쟁대위 회의에 참석하여 그 회의내용이나 집행부의 지침 등을 선봉대 대원들에게 전달하여 주는 중요한 역할을 수행하였다는 점, 쌍용자동차 노조는 2009. 4. 9. 임시대의원대회를 개최하여 집행부 간부 34명과 대의원대표 7명, 창원지회 지회장과 대의원대표 각 1명, 정비지회 지회장과 대의원대표 각 1명 등 합계 45명이 위원으로 참가하는 중앙쟁대위를 구성하고 향후 파업일정과 방법 등 파업에 관련된 모든 세부사항의 결정권한을 중앙쟁대위에 위임하여 주었는데, 이렇게 권한위임을 받은 중앙쟁대위가 조합원들의 찬반투표를 거쳐 2009. 5. 21. 공장점거파업을 하기로 결정한 것이라는 점, 점거파업의 과정에서 중앙쟁대위는 집회의 선두에 서서 집회를 주도하는 선봉대를 조직함과 아울러 조합원들을 소속 팀이나 지회별로 편성하여 평택공장의 출입문과 옥상 등 각 거점에 배치하고, 복면, 마스크, 쇠 파이프, 새총, 다연발 대포, 화염병 등을 준비하여 이를 조합원들에게 나누어 주거나 거점별로 비치한 다음, 조합원들을 상대로 수차례에 걸친 전술훈련과 거점별 전술토론, 쇠 파이프 사용방법 훈련, 화염병투척시범 등의 일정을 진행하여 쌍용자동차의 임직원이나 경찰의 진입에 대비하도록 하였다는 점, 쌍용자동차 노조의 조합원 중 900여 명이 위와 같은 중앙쟁대위 위원 내지는 대의원대표와 선봉대 대장인 피고인들의 위와 같은 주도면밀한 지휘와 계획 아래 범죄사실 제3항 기재와 같이 쌍용자동차 평택공장의 출입통제, 건물점거 등을 행하였고, 그 과정에서 조합원들이 다중의 위력으로서 위험한 물건인 새총, 쇠 파이프, 화염병 등을 휴대하여 범죄사실 제4의 나 내지 자항 기재와 같이 쌍용자동차 임직원들에 대한 폭행, 상해 및 체포, 진입경찰에 대한 폭행 및 상해 등의 각종 범죄행위를 저지른 것이라는 점, 파업에 참여한 인원의 규모나 과열된 당시의 분위기 등을 감안할 때 피고인들로서는 쌍용자동차 평택공장을 점거하고 있는 조합원들과 정상조업을 희망하면서 평택공장에 진입하려는 쌍용자동차 임직원들 사이의 분쟁, 집단적인 점거농성 과정에서 표출될 조합원들의 과격한 행동, 진압을 위한 경찰과의 물리적 충돌과 그에 따른 집단적 폭행, 상해행위가 뒤따를 것을 충분히 예상할 수 있었다고 보임에도 이를 방지하기에 충분한 합리적이고 적절한 조치도 없이 오히려 위와 같은 집단행동을 독려하고 감행하였다는 점과 그 밖에 위 집단행동들의 성격과 경위, 그 규모와 형태, 구체적인 방법과 진행과정, 그 과정에서 피고인들의 지위 및 역할, 쟁의행위 중인 노동조합이라는 조직화된 단체에서 지휘계통을 통한 실행행위에 대한 지배 내지 장악력이라는 관점 등에 비추어 보면, 피고인들이 비록 조합원들의 판시 각 폭행, 체포, 상해 등 범죄행위들 중 일부에 대하여 구체적으로 모의하거나 이를 직접 분담하여 실행한 바가 없었다 하더라도, 위 각 범행에 대한 암묵적인 공모는 물론 그 범행들에 대한 본질적 기여를 통한 기능적 행위지배가 존재하는 자들로 인정된다 할 것이므로, 쌍용자동차 노조 조합원들이 행한 위 각 범행에 대한 공모공동정범으로서의 죄책을 면할 수 없다. 따라서 피고인들의 위 주장 역시 받아들이지 않는다.

1. Summary of the facts charged

At around 15:30 on June 25, 2009, more than 3,000 executives and employees wishing to engage in the normal operation of both motor vehicles participate in the "Resolution for the Promotion of Management of Both Motor Vehicles" in the latter part of the Pyeongtaek Factory, and move to the north door, and cross-in with the steel network between them.

In the meantime, a member of the name unexploited association who was in the process of the occupation wave was deprived of the steel chain, resulting in the victim non-indicted 11 (Nam, 46)'s loss, which was a dangerous object, down to the hack pipe.

As a result, Defendant 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, 21, and 22 conspired with other disputing members and 90 members, including the other disputing members and those in the above name default, on the right side of 14-day medical treatment.

2. Determination

Even in accordance with the statements in this Court, the victim participated with 1,00 executive officers and employees of two motor vehicles at the time stated in the facts charged, and immediately moved to the 4 seconds of two motor vehicles, and was replaced with those who were in the factory with the steel network fence installed therein, and 20-30 executive officers and employees, including the victim, were removed from the steel network fence, and entered the factory into the factory, 1,000 executive officers and employees of two motor vehicles at 1,00 and the 1,000 executive officers and employees of two motor vehicles at 1,00, and immediately moved to the 1,00,000 and the 1,000 plenarys and employees of two motor vehicles at 1,00,000 were moved to the 4,00,000,000,000,000 were 1,000,000,000,000,000).

As the Defendants asserts, the fundamental cause of the management crisis, which is currently being faced by two automobiles, lies in the sale of the two automobiles into the Chinese upper and lower-tier automobile, which is the speculative capital of both automobiles around October 2004, and the sale of the two automobiles to the Chinese upper and lower-tier automobile, and the poor management of the upper and lower-tier automobile and the mistake of the government that neglected it. However, the company attempted to make a high-level restructuring of the high-level number of employees who did not mislead any mistake on the ground of the reason that the company is securing operating funds through cost reduction, and thus, the industrial action and strike in this case, which are punished, were inevitable choice to protect the employees' right to life. In order to oppose this, we agree with the argument that the industrial action and strike in this case were inevitable to protect the employees' right to life. In particular, if workers who were subject to layoff under the restructuring policy as above, lose their work as one day without any special mistake, thereby preventing one’s home, and if they suffer from the future economic situation and family members in the future.

However, under the pretext of accomplishing their claim that the Defendants could not be dismissed, the Defendants continued to engage in a partial strike over 29 times in two automobile Pyeongtaek factories and Changwon factories, and continued to engage in the instant strike for 77 days after which they illegally occupied the factories, and went to the actual state immediately before the bankruptcy, and caused severe mental and physical damage in the course of preventing various acts of violence, such as property damage and injury, etc. in the process. In other cases where the Defendants expressed their legitimacy through the instant industrial action and illegal occupation and strike, the Defendants suffered from the mental and physical damage of the large scale of two cars, both officers and employees of the majority of two cars who have made efforts to normalize the company as soon as possible, or those of the cooperation companies related to the cooperation companies and their neighboring local residents faced with the crisis of chain of chain due to the suspension of their business due to the strike of the two cars.

Even if the Defendants’ assertion is justified, the Republic of Korea should take place within the framework prescribed by the Constitution and Act so long as the Republic of Korea is a rule of law. Such procedural justice can not be said to be a minor legal interest than the objective that the Defendants intended to achieve. Nevertheless, the Defendants were not only going against the positive law that exists strictly, but also intended to achieve their demands in violent means considerably beyond the ordinarily acceptable limit. Of course, the Defendants, who were in the position of the executive officer of the labor union to represent the interests of its members in the situation faced with the situation in which many workers are subject to layoff, may have been inevitably forced to make the choice of the executive officer of the labor union in order to prevent the large-scale situation of workers. However, even if the Defendants or members committed such imminent circumstances, holding a large quantity of inflammable dangerous substances as well as the national infrastructure industrial facilities, and thus, holding a large quantity of inflammable dangerous substances, and thus making it difficult for the Defendants to realize their demands by means of violence against the State’s industrial power without permission.

In particular, Defendant 1 planned and promoted the strike of this case from the beginning for 77 days including the industrial action of this case as a chapter head of a pair of motor vehicles trade unions. The person in charge of this case who continuously encouraged and urged union members to engage in strike and violence even during the process of lock-out and the government power of the company. Defendant 2 and 22 also actively participated in not only the leading role in the strike of this case and violence with Defendant 1 but also the individual violence prior to the strike of this case. Defendant 3, Defendant 11, the head of the welfare planning office, Defendant 12, Defendant 13, the head of the education promotion office, and Defendant 14, the chief of the financial affairs office, also constituted the executive department, and actively participated in the decision-making of central subrogation and actively assisted Defendant 1 in order to maintain the strike of this case. In light of the contents of this case's punishment and punishment corresponding to this case's unlawful act.

However, as seen earlier, when both members of the labor union who are in the position of the socially and economically weak face large-scale situation, the industrial action and the strike in this case were caused to protect their right to their survival. The officers, including Defendant 4, were involved in the strike in order to represent the interests of the members of the labor union and to prevent large-scale damages. After the strike in this case, there was an agreement between the victims and the members of the labor union to withdraw criminal complaints and complaints against the general members who participated in the strike in the strike in addition to the fact that the decision to authorize the rehabilitation plan of the two automobiles was made, there was no possibility of rehabilitation of the two automobiles. After that, there was no particular decision to authorize the rehabilitation plan of the two automobiles, there was no other favorable circumstance for the Defendants, such as the fact that two automobiles who are victims, were in the position of the chief of the labor union or the executive branch of the labor union to defend their interests and represent their position, and that there was no other mental harm to the members of the labor union, the president of the labor union or the president of the labor-management, and the labor-management.

In full view of such various conditions of sentencing, the sentence against the Defendants shall be determined as per the disposition.

[Attachment]

Judge Or-An (Presiding Judge) Lee Jin-ho and Lee Jin-hun