All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant B (misunderstanding of facts) did not know in advance that it was an unreported assembly at the time of the instant case. Defendant B arrived at the site of 20: (a) and participated in an assembly; and (b) the time during which the Defendant was present at the assembly, the road was obstructed by police and police forces, and the vehicle traffic was not possible.

In addition, the defendant did not exercise any violence and did not do any direct act that causes traffic obstruction.

B. Defendant C (unfair sentencing)’s punishment (an amount of one million won) by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to Defendant B’s assertion of mistake, general traffic obstruction under Article 185 of the Criminal Act is a crime that legally protects the general public’s traffic safety, the purpose of which is to punish all acts that make it impossible or considerably difficult to pass by causing damage to land, road, etc., interference with traffic by other means, or interfere with traffic by other means. General traffic obstruction is a so-called abstract dangerous crime where traffic is impossible or considerably difficult to pass by, or if it is an abstract dangerous crime, it is immediately impossible or difficult to pass by, and the result of traffic obstruction is not practically impossible (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 95Do1475, Sept. 15, 1995; 2004Do7545, Oct. 28, 2005). Furthermore, in light of the legislative intent and legislative intent of the Assembly and Demonstration Act, if a legitimate report is made on the road after completion of an assembly or demonstration, it is inevitable that the traffic obstruction or demonstration has not been reported within the scope of the reported road.

Even if there are no special circumstances, the general traffic obstruction under Article 185 of the Criminal Code shall not be deemed to be established, but the assembly or demonstration shall be made.