Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 500,000.

Where the defendant fails to pay the above fine, one hundred thousand won shall be one day.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is the head of the branch office of the Korea Trade Union E branch under the CFE.

On January 30, 2013, at around 15:58, the Defendant gathered to participate in the “Resolution 1,300 to remove non-regular workers, withdraw the distribution of damages, discontinue the destruction of labor,” which was organized by the Cirst of the Cirst of Yongsan-gu Seoul, Yongsan-gu, Yongsan-gu, Seoul, and went into the chamber of commerce and industry with approximately 1,30 participants of the above conference using two lanes from the above conference to the place where the assembly is reported. On the same day, at around 17:00, the Defendant moved in the way before the conference was reported, and went into the parallel of commerce and industry with approximately 1,30 lanes from the above conference to the place where the assembly is reported. On the same day, at around 17:00, the Defendant moved in four lanes of the five lanes of the old Samsung Cirth of the end of the building and obstructed the traffic of the vehicle by not later than 17:47 on the same day.

Accordingly, the defendant conspired with the above participants in the assembly and interfered with the traffic by land.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. An outdoor assembly and a report on the progress thereof, and a report on the status of information;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes on assembly, demonstration photograph, and assembly flow photograph;

1. Article 185 of the Criminal Act and Articles 185 and 30 of the Criminal Act concerning the crime, the choice of fines, and the selection of fines;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The defendant and his defense counsel's assertion on the claim of the defendant and his defense counsel under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act alleged that there was no criminal intent to obstruct traffic by attending an assembly of the defendant merely a simple participant, and that it was not a situation where traffic obstruction was committed by the defendant's act. Thus, considering the circumstances revealed through each evidence of the judgment, such as the following: the defendant and the assembly participants, including the defendant, occupy the road, the details and method of occupying the road, the size and place of the assembly, the progress of the assembly, the degree of traffic obstruction caused thereby, and the progress of the assembly, the criminal facts stated in the judgment of the defendant.