[1] The purport of Article 21 of the former Assembly and Demonstration Act on the violation of the dispersion order

[2] Where members of a social organization, etc. who were seeking to hold an assembly without any lawful report, collected to rest or take meals at the close of the neighboring church, and the chief of the competent police station received an order for dispersion from the chief of the competent police station, the case holding that the act of failing to comply with such order does not constitute a violation of the order for dispersion under the former Assembly and Demonstration Act

[1] In light of the legislative purpose of the former Assembly and Demonstration Act (amended by Act No. 7849 of Feb. 21, 2006) and the constitutional spirit that guarantees citizens’ right to freedom of assembly and demonstration, the purpose of the crime of violation of the dispersion order under Article 21 of the same Act is to immediately or ex post dissolve an assembly or demonstration without a legitimate assembly report and punish those refusing to comply with such order to maintain public safety and order by ensuring that the planned assembly or demonstration should be properly in harmony with the guarantee of the right to assembly and demonstration and public peace and order by guaranteeing the maximum freedom of assembly and demonstration and protecting citizens from unlawful assembly and demonstration, and the purpose of the crime of violation of the dispersion order under Article 21 of the same Act is to prevent in advance the assembly or demonstration from being unlawful or reported, or to block the participation of those who have not been reported.

[2] The case holding that, in case where members of the social organization, etc., who were trying to hold an opposing assembly to move to the usfk base in Korea without legitimate assembly report, take rest or take meals at the nearby church meeting while moving to the middle gathering place, and they do not comply with the order of dispersion issued by the chief of the competent police station, it is merely a preparatory stage for participating in the assembly, and it does not constitute an assembly or demonstration subject to dispersion order under Article 18 (1) of the former Assembly and Demonstration Act (amended by Act No. 7849 of Feb. 21, 2006), and therefore, the above order of dispersion is lawful and does not constitute a violation of the dispersion order

[1] Articles 6 (see current Article 20 (2) (see current Article 20 (2)), 18 (2) (see current Article 24 subparagraph 5) and 21 subparagraph 1 (see current Article 24 subparagraph 5) of the former Assembly and Demonstration Act (Amended by Act No. 7849, Feb. 21, 2006) / [2] Articles 6 ( current Article), 18 (2) (see current Article 20 (2)) and 21 subparagraph 1 (see current Article 24 subparagraph 5) of the former Assembly and Demonstration Act

Defendant 1 and four others

Freeboard

Law Firm Dasan, Attorneys Sok-ju et al.

A sentence of punishment shall be suspended against the defendant 5.

Defendant 1, 2, 3, and 4 are not guilty

Defendant 5 is a member of the Korean Teachers’ Union (hereinafter referred to as the “Korean Teachers’ Union”).

The Ministry of National Defense, under the Agreement between the Republic of Korea and the United States of America on Relocation from Seoul District of the United States Armed Forces, etc., against the project, on the grounds that the project for the relocation of the U.S. military base, which was implemented pursuant to the "Agreement between the Republic of Korea and the United States of America on Relocation from Seoul District of the United States Armed Forces, violates the people's right to live in the planned area of the U.S. military base relocation, etc., and infringes on the people's right to live in the said project, shall pass a resolution to block the relocation of the U.S. military base by inviting members, organizations and organizations belonging to each of the above joint organization, organizations, and organizations, such as Pyeongtaek-si Military Base Expansion, the Korean Federation of the Korean University Federation of Korea (hereinafter referred to as the "Korean Federation"), the Korean Democratic Union Federation of the Korean Trade Union (hereinafter referred to as the "Korean Federation") in combination with other social organizations, such as the "The 4th National Assembly of the U.S. Armed Forces relocation counter" (hereinafter referred to as the "fourth National Park").

On May 14, 2006, at the front of the U.S. A., the head of the Ansan-si located in Pyeongtaek-si, Pyeongtaek-si, the head of the competent local police station was ordered to take three times or more of the members of the U.S. police station, who was working as the head of the competent local police station, while playing on the Do newsletter to go to the 4th National Assembly of the Republic of Korea, while participating in the 4th National Assembly of the Republic of Korea, the head of the competent local police station was ordered to take three times or more for the head of the regional police station who was working as the head of the competent local police station, while the head of the local police station was taking three times or more for the head of the

1. Each legal statement of the witness, Nonindicted 1 and Nonindicted 2

1. Each police interrogation protocol against Defendant 5 and Nonindicted 3

1. A written statement of arrest (a pages 425 of investigation records);

1. A report on investigation (for example, No. 482 of investigation records);

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning criminal facts;

Articles 21 subparag. 1 and 18(2) of the Assembly and Demonstration Act (Law No. 7123), Article 30 of the Criminal Act

1. Suspension of sentence;

Article 59 (1) of the Criminal Code: The defendant has no previous conviction, and the facts that he is a teacher's status and the circumstances to be taken into account in the instant case are considered [Article 59 (1) of the Criminal Code, 500,000 won per day of confinement for exchange, 50,000 won per day of confinement for exchange, 2

1. Summary of the facts charged

Defendant 1: (a) Defendant 1 was opposed to the above project on the ground that the Head of the Democratic Labor-General of the Korea Army; (b) Defendant 2 was the Secretary of the 3th Bridge branch office; (c) Defendant 3 was the former members of the NA; and (d) Defendants 4 were the members of the U.S. military base relocation project promoted under the Agreement between the Republic of Korea and the United States of America regarding the Relocation of the Seoul District of the United States Armed Forces; and (c) Defendant 1 was opposed to the project on the grounds that the project would violate his own faith and infringe on the residents’ right to life in the planned area to be incorporated into the U.S. military base; (d) Defendant 4,00 members of the above organization; (d) Defendant 4,00 members of the 4,00 members of the NA branch office; and (d) Defendant 282-1, 27, 2000 new police stations, which were under the jurisdiction of the U.S. military base relocation; and (d) Defendant 27, 10000, new police units of the front.

2. Determination:

(a) Provisions and purport of punishment;

According to Articles 6 and 18 of the Assembly and Demonstration Act, in the event of an assembly or demonstration without a lawful assembly report, the chief of the competent police station may demand voluntary dispersion within a reasonable time, and in the event of failure to comply with the demand for voluntary dispersion, he/she may order dispersion at least three times, and in the event of failure to comply with the demand for voluntary dispersion, sanctions for criminal punishment shall be imposed in accordance with Article 21 of the same Act for participants who do not withdraw even after receiving the said dispersion order.

However, in light of the legislative purpose of the above Act and the constitutional spirit that guarantee the right of assembly and demonstration and the freedom of assembly to properly harmonize with the public peace and order by guaranteeing a legitimate assembly and demonstration to the maximum extent possible, and protecting citizens from unlawful demonstrations, the purport of the above penal provision is to immediately dissolve an assembly or demonstration without legitimate assembly report or ex post facto, and punish those refusing to do so, and thereby to maintain public safety and order. It is a harmonious interpretation that the above assembly or demonstration should not be prevented or prevented in advance from participating in the assembly or demonstration on the ground that there is no unlawful or reported assembly or demonstration.

B. Determination on the legality of the dispersion order

In full view of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor and the results of Nonindicted 4’s legal statement and the evidence verification of the video CD in this court, the fact that the above Defendants was flicked to attend the fourth national conference held in the Peace Park around 11:00 on the same day, and that the entry into the said Peace Park was obstructed in advance, and the above reorganization was proceeded in the agricultural community in the middle place 4 km away from the place where the said peace Park was located, and the person who was staying in the said place was 15 persons including the above Defendants, and was 15 persons, who were flicked or flicked to rest until 10:00 on the same day, and did not possess goods used for an assembly or demonstration, such as a flick or a flick that was written by the relief.

Thus, in light of the above circumstances, the above defendants' situation where the above defendants temporarily gather in the new party meeting is limited to the preparation stage for participation in the meeting, and the assembly or demonstration subject to dispersion under the Act on the Assembly and Demonstration (the above "auction" is defined as "the act of many people, including roads, squares, parks, etc. where many people can freely pass through, or exert influence on, unspecified people's opinions or suppressions," in light of the fact that the above defendants are defined as "an act of having a meeting with common purpose" and "an act of gathering at a certain place with a specific purpose" should not be interpreted as "an act of gathering a meeting" (the fact inquiry letter by the Commissioner of the Gyeonggi-do Police Agency). There is no evidence to acknowledge that the above defendants did not have any active act on the ground that the above defendants collected the above defendants' temporary gathering to attend the meeting in a dangerous area.

Ultimately, insofar as it is not recognized that there was an assembly subject to the order of dissolution as above (the assembly scheduled to be opened was held in the vicinity of the new political party branch, such as the agricultural cooperative, etc., in comparison with the initial plan later according to the authorities' source salary reform, or it cannot be said that this conclusion differs solely on the ground that the assembly place could have been changed from the beginning). The order of dissolution issued by the chief of the district police station having jurisdiction over domestic affairs was issued, and even if the above Defendants did not comply with the order, the order of dispersion itself is not legitimate, and thus the Defendants cannot be punished as a violation of the order.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, this part of the facts charged against the above Defendants constitutes a case where there is no proof of crime and thus, the said Defendants are acquitted under the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

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

Judges Yang Sung-soo