The judgment below

Part concerning Defendant A and B shall be reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment for eight months and by imprisonment for defendant B.

1. Scope of trial of the political party after remand;

A. 1) The lower court found the Defendants not guilty of violation of the Assembly and Demonstration Act among the facts charged in the instant case, and found the Defendants guilty of the remainder of the charges. Accordingly, the Defendants filed each appeal against the acquittal portion, and the Prosecutor filed each appeal against the acquittal portion. 2) The first instance court prior to the remanded the Defendants and the Prosecutor’s appeal on the grounds that both the Defendants and the Prosecutor’s appeal is groundless.

Accordingly, the prosecutor appealed to the Defendants before the remanding of the case.

3. The Supreme Court erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the violation of the Assembly and Demonstration Act against the Defendants in the judgment of the party prior to remand. In the case of concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, the entire judgment of the court below should be reversed, and the whole part of the judgment of the court prior to remand should be reversed and remanded to the Defendants.

B. The scope of the trial of the party after remanding according to the scope of the trial of the party after remanding shall be the entire part of the judgment below against the Defendants.

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The judgment of the court below which found the defendants guilty of obstruction of business, violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (limited to the defendant B), violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (limited to the defendant A), and violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (limited to the defendant A), and general traffic obstruction is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles and erroneous determination

(b) Prosecutors;

A. The judgment of the court below that acquitted Defendants of violation of the Assembly and Demonstration Act is unlawful by misapprehending the legal principles, which found Defendants not guilty of the violation of the Assembly and Demonstration Act, even though they could acknowledge the fact of demonstration by misapprehending the legal principles.

B. The lower court’s sentence Defendant A against the Defendants on the grounds of unfair sentencing: imprisonment for eight months and by eight months.