The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

It is unfair for the following reasons that the court below recognized that the injury caused to K due to the defendant's act was caused by mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles.

L and K's statements are not reliable.

The defendant, while carrying the brush, has pushed K with the brush and has not tried to cut off the brush.

The intention of injury can not be recognized only with respect to the police officers who have opened the booms by themselves.

K is likely to suffer an injury in the course of cutting off the spawn from other demonstration teams.

In general traffic obstruction part, the defendant was a simple participant of an assembly or demonstration, and the defendant committed an act of direct traffic obstruction.

No person may be found guilty of general traffic obstruction solely on the ground that he/she is a participant of an assembly or demonstration or a member of metal labor unions, without proof of a specific public contest relationship with the person who committed such act.

The punishment sentenced by the court below (one year and six months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution) is too unreasonable.

Judgment

In light of the substance of the first instance judgment and the evidence duly examined by the first instance court, based on the spirit of the principle of substantial direct examination adopted by the Korean Criminal Procedure Act as an element of the trial-oriented principle, the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance court is clearly erroneous, or the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance court is clearly unreasonable considering the results of the first instance court’s examination and the results of additional evidence examination conducted by the time of closing argument in the appellate court, except in exceptional cases where it is deemed significantly unfair to maintain the first instance judgment on the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance court.