All appeals filed by prosecutors and defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) The Defendant did not know at all about the front assembly of the National Assembly, which was not a misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles.

In addition, it did not hear the dispersion order of the police.

Moreover, the dispersion order is not legitimate only when a direct threat to public peace and order exists.

2) The punishment sentenced by the lower court (an amount of KRW 500,000) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant’s assertion of misunderstanding the facts and misapprehension of the legal doctrine of the Defendant alleged at the lower court, and the lower court rejected the aforementioned assertion on the grounds that the Defendant’s act cannot be deemed lawful due to the legal ground that the National Assembly’s death was the place where assembly is prohibited. The head of the competent police station requested voluntary dispersion of an outdoor assembly at a place where assembly is prohibited in accordance with the prescribed procedure, and the participants failed to comply therewith, and ordered dissolution, and multiple dispersion orders were made using a loudspeaker, etc. at a place where anyone participating in the assembly can hear.

In light of the following circumstances admitted by the court below based on the evidence duly examined and adopted by the court below, the judgment of the court below is just and acceptable. Contrary to the defendant's assertion, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

subsection (b) of this section.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

The Defendant was unaware of the previous assembly of the National Assembly at all before the main office.

Although the facts charged against the defendant are stated, the main content of the charge is that the defendant participated in the assembly (the applicable legal provisions in the indictment are assembly and assembly.