The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is the head of the Korean Democratic Trade Union Korea Branch D branch (hereinafter “Private Partnership”).

From November 14, 2015, the headquarters for the strike against the general public, consisting of 53 citizens and social organizations, including the total labor union, was planned to proceed with the assembly in advance from around November 14, 2015 to five teams, including labor (Seoul square), farmers (Seoul Pyeongro), citizens (university to Maro Park), young people (university to Maro Park in university), and vacant people (Seoul Station Maro Park), and then to proceed with the "the total substitute competitions from among the public under the Marop Maol", which are prohibited by gathering in the luminous square and notify of the prohibition.

Accordingly, the defendant, along with the above participants of the assembly, moved along with the lanes prior to the two directions of the Seoul Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Council from November 14, 2015 to November 15:20 of the same day from November 14, 2015 to 15:00 of the same day.

Accordingly, the defendant conspired with the above participants in the assembly and interfered with the traffic by land.

2. In light of the legislative intent of Article 6(1) of the Assembly and Demonstration Act (hereinafter “the Assembly Act”) and Article 6(1) of the Assembly and Demonstration Act, in a case where a lawful report is completed under the Assembly and Demonstration Act and an assembly or demonstration on the road is conducted on the road, the traffic of the road is restricted to a certain degree. Thus, in a case where the assembly or demonstration was conducted within the reported scope or it was conducted differently from the reported contents, and thereby, the traffic of the road was obstructed.

Even if there are no special circumstances, it cannot be deemed that a crime of interference with general traffic under Article 185 of the Criminal Act is established.

However, in a case where the assembly or demonstration significantly deviates from the scope of the original report, or seriously violates the conditions under Article 12 of the Assembly and Demonstration Act, making it impossible or considerably difficult to pass through by interfering with road traffic, the assembly or demonstration constitutes a crime of interference with general traffic (Supreme Court Decision 13 November 13, 2008).