All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) In the judgment of the court below, the guilty part of the judgment of the court below is erroneous by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles as follows.

① There was no room to obstruct the traffic of a vehicle at the time due to the 1st and second I distance of interference with general traffic, or to endanger the traffic safety of a vehicle driver, etc. or the body of a vehicle driver, etc., and thus, there was an act of traffic interference.

subsection (b) of this section.

In addition, this is within the scope of assembly and demonstration guaranteed by the Constitution, so it is not illegal as a legitimate act that does not go against the social norms.

B. At the time of the second step, the defendant did not go first to N Council members by taking over for the purpose of monitoring public authority at the time of the second step, but did not occupy the lane with the second step together with the second step.

(2) A defendant who violates the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint residential intrusion) was in C.

Since it is only an entry into C with the help of workers as a concern of F's security, there was no intention of intrusion on residence.

(3) From among violations of the Assembly and Demonstration Act, the part of the participation in the night demonstration is not provided for in the Assembly and Demonstration Act, and thus, the report on the night demonstration is not reported.

The demonstration at night was a peaceful atmosphere on June 12, 201 and the maintenance of social safety and order was infringed due to the occurrence of traffic communication problems.

Therefore, the above facts charged cannot be seen as being guilty.

④ The charges of non-compliance with the dispersion order among the charges of violating the Assembly and Demonstration Act are based on the premise that the second participants conducted a demonstration, and the grounds for dissolution notified in the second first order was “unreported assembly,” and thus, the grounds for dissolution do not coincide with the grounds for dissolution stated in the facts charged at the time of the dispersion order, and the aforementioned grounds for dissolution do not coincide with each other at the time of the dispersion order.