Text
The judgment below
The guilty part shall be reversed.
The crime of violation, injury, and injury of the Assembly and Demonstration Act, each of which is held by the defendant.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. As to Defendant 1’s act of violation of Article 7(1) of the National Security Act among the 7059 High Order 2013 High Order 7059, Defendant 1 did not act knowingly with the knowledge that there is no clear risk that the State’s existence and security or democratic fundamental order does not pose any harm to the State, and that the Defendant’s act may endanger the State’s existence and security or democratic fundamental order.
With respect to the violation of Article 7(5) of the National Security Act, the expressive materials indicated in the facts charged in the instant case are not different from the expressive materials, but are not recognized as the purpose of engaging in the act, and there was no perception that the Defendant may endanger the existence and security of the State or the fundamental democratic order.
As to the violation of the Assembly and Demonstration Act, the defendant held a non-reported assembly merely because he had a press conference.
subsection (b) of this section.
B) As to the 2014 Highest 4573 case, the Defendant, as a simple participant in the assembly, was seated on the road according to the direction of the organizer of the assembly, and the Defendant was at all aware of the details of the report at the time, and the seat of the Defendant was above the lane on which the report of the assembly was filed, and thus there was no intention to interfere with the general traffic.
C) As to the obstruction of business among the 2014 Highest 6009 cases, the Defendant: (a) 20 hours to 20 minutes and 20 minutes; and (b) 30 minutes to prevent the entry of the vehicle by carrying a loudspeaker and speaking with the residents; and (c) preventing the entry of the vehicle. As to the injury, the Defendant is not intentionally shouldered by the victim GK’s hand.
D) With respect to the case of the 2014 Highest 6176 case, the Defendant was merely a victim’s G Q and the tea, and was in the course of making the victim Q and the tea, and did not assault the victim.
E) Regarding the 2015 Highest 2352 case, the Defendant entered the construction site to resist that the discussion of GI differs from that of GI.