The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendants are not guilty. The summary of this judgment is publicly announced.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Error of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles (defendants) ① The worship that the victim F entered the Edial Association around 10:5 on March 25, 2018 (hereinafter “the instant worship”) is difficult to be deemed as a worship that is subject to the protection of the crime of interference with worship under the Criminal Act. ② The Defendants attempted to notify the members attending the instant worship that “F would no longer be dismissed and thus, they cannot deliver the worship.” Thus, it cannot be deemed as interference with worship. ③ Even if the Defendants were to commit the act of obstructing the instant worship, such act constitutes a justifiable act that does not go against the social rules.

Nevertheless, the court below convicted the charged facts of this case. The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles and thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence of an unreasonable sentencing (Defendant A) sentenced by the lower court (hereinafter referred to as a fine of KRW 500,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Summary of the facts charged and the judgment of the court below

A. The summary of the facts charged is as follows: Defendant B is a pastor of the E church belonging to the C General Assembly D Assembly.

Defendant

A is a pastor dispatched from the above D's Association to E's temporary E's holding company.

The victim F is a person dismissed from office due to a conflict with C General Assembly D's D's D's D's D's D's D's D's D's D's D's D's D's D's D's D's D's D's D's D's D's D's D

On March 25, 2018, the Defendants conspired, and around 10:55 on March 25, 2018, when the victim F and 27 members of the Escopian are sent to the Escopian, Defendant B, who opened a towing entrance and entered Defendant B, called “Iscopher, is not a pastor, width is dismissed, and Iscopir scopirs” to the victim F, and the Defendant A, who was enrolled into the upper platform, should pay to the victim F, “Iscopher, why is, and why is, what is, what is, and what is, what is, what is, whatever.”