All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

The judgment below

Examining the evidence duly adopted by the first instance court, which maintained the reasoning of the judgment, the court below is just in holding that the court below found Defendant A guilty of violation of the Act on the Assembly and Demonstration against Defendant B, violation of the Act on the Punishment of Violences due to Defendant B, C, D, and E's obstruction of duties and the denial of joint withdrawal, violation of the Act on the Punishment of Violences due to the joint withdrawal, violation of the Act on the Assembly and Demonstration against Defendant B, violation of each of the Acts on October 22, 2014 against Defendant B and C, violation of the Act on the Punishment of Violences due to joint injury, joint assault, and damage to each of the joint property, and violation of the Act on the Punishment of Violences, etc. due to each of the joint property damage as alleged in the grounds for appeal. In so doing, the court below did not err by misapprehending the legal principles on the act of dispute

In addition, the argument that the judgment of the court below is erroneous in the deliberation of sentencing conditions is ultimately unfair.

Therefore, under Article 383 subparag. 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, an appeal is permitted only for cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for not less than ten years has been imposed. As such, in this case where a minor sentence has been imposed against the Defendants, the argument that the punishment is too unreasonable is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

Therefore, all appeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.