The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant shall be innocent.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. On November 14, 2015, the lower court determined that: (a) the Defendant’s act of entering the N with the demonstration team around 14:51 on November 14, 2015; (b) the Defendant started from 15:30 to 16:10 to 16:10 to moved along with the participants of other assemblies; (c) but the Defendant did not hold a separate prior assembly; (d) Tnonob, to which the Defendant was affiliated, proceeded from N from 15:20 to 16:20; and (e) the Defendant was present from 15:20 to 16:10 to 16:10 to 15; and (e) the Defendant participated in E reported by the Defendant by seating at the W lane; and (e) the act of the Defendant participating in the assembly on the road by asserting the misapprehension of the legal doctrine does not include the act of interference with general traffic, damage, damage, or any other similar method.

The police, at around 15:20, the prior 14:55, the Defendant, who was in W, prevented traffic flow by installing a double wall, so it is difficult to view that there is a causal relationship with the Defendant’s act and traffic obstruction.

The defendant cannot be deemed to have committed an act that may cause traffic obstruction, and the defendant who is merely a simple participant does not have any reason to assume the responsibility of the co-principal.

3) The sentence (one million won of fine) imposed by the lower court on the ground of unfair sentencing is too unreasonable. B. The prosecutor’s appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing (one million won of fine) by the lower court is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Determination on the grounds for appeal

A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is as follows: (a) the Defendant, the chief of T labor union U.S. Branch’s organization under the organization B (hereinafter “B”) participated in the J assembly held in Seoul, etc. on November 14, 2015, starting from N around 15:30 with the demonstration team and starting from N at around 15:30 with the demonstration team, and interfering with traffic by occupying W B B B’s lanes and driving along with the participants at around 16:10.

B. The lower court determined that the Defendant at the time of the instant case is by another participant in the assembly.