Of the judgment of the court below against the defendant, paragraphs (3) 1, (3) and (3) of the annexed list of crimes.

1. Progress of judgment and scope of judgment of this court;

A. The Defendant was indicted of defamation, violation of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, etc. (Defamation) and violation of the Assembly and Demonstration Act, and the lower court convicted all of the facts charged.

B. On the ground of an erroneous determination of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles, or unreasonable sentencing, the Defendant filed an appeal on the ground of unfair sentencing, and the prior trial of the case was reversed the lower judgment against the Defendant, and found the Defendant guilty of violation of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Demonstration and Information Protection, etc. (Defamation) and violation of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, etc. (Defamation) under Articles 1 and 3 of the attached list of crimes (3), and not guilty of violation of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, etc. (Defamation) and attached

C. The Defendant filed an appeal against the acquittal portion of the judgment of the court prior to remand, with respect to the conviction portion among the judgment of the court of appeal prior to remand, and the Supreme Court rejected all of the Defendant’s assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, and rejected all of the Prosecutor’s arguments against the rules of evidence, incomplete hearing

However, the Supreme Court rendered a ruling of inconsistency with the Constitution as to the above legal provision after rendering a ruling of inconsistency with the Constitution as to the facts charged that the trial prior to remand was guilty by applying Articles 23 subparag. 1 and 11 subparag. 1 of the Assembly and Demonstration Act, and rendered a ruling of inconsistency with the Constitution as to the above legal provision, the judgment prior to the remand of this part cannot be maintained, and the judgment prior to the remand of this part constitutes concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act.