All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

가. 피고인 ⑴ 법리오해 ㈎ 형법상 일반교통방해죄 적용의 부당성 집회시위를 하면서 일시적으로 도로에 서 있거나 앉아 있는 경우를 손괴, 불통에 준하는 정도의 교통방해를 초래하는 방법으로 교통을 방해한 것으로 해석하여 일반교통방해죄로 처벌하여서는 아니된다.

Even if many people hold an assembly which is not reported in advance on the road or hold an assembly by deviating from the reported scope on the road, they can be punished as a crime of non-compliance with the dispersion order under the Assembly and Demonstration Act (hereinafter “the Assembly and Demonstration Act”), or can only be punished as a crime of violation of the Assembly and Demonstration Act against the organizer of the unreported assembly and demonstration, and it cannot be viewed as a crime of interference

㈏ 공소권남용 검사가 미신고 집회 또는 신고 범위를 일탈한 집회의 단순참가자들에 대하여 선별적으로 일반교통방해죄로 기소하는 것은 공소권을 남용한 것이다.

B. The sentence of the first instance of unfair sentencing (two months of imprisonment, one year of suspended execution) is too unreasonable.

(b)the first instance sentence of the inspection (unfairness) is too unhued and unfair;

2. Determination

A. As to the Defendant’s assertion of misapprehension of the legal doctrine, in a case where an assembly or demonstration was conducted within the reported scope or was conducted differently from the reported scope, and thus, the traffic obstruction of road traffic under Article 185 of the Criminal Act is not established, barring special circumstances, even though there was no substantial deviation from the reported scope. However, in a case where an assembly or demonstration substantially deviates from the reported scope and makes it impossible or considerably difficult to pass traffic by interfering with road traffic, general traffic obstruction is established.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2006Do755 Decided November 13, 2008). On a different premise, the Defendant becomes the Defendant.