The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

1. The Defendant appealed on the sole ground of unreasonable sentencing on the ground of the gist of the grounds of appeal, but the Defendant appointed a private legal counsel after the lapse of the period for filing a statement of grounds of appeal. Since the instant demonstration was duly reported, the Defendant argued to the effect that all of the charges of this case are acquitted.

2. Each of the facts charged

A. A. Around 22:00 on August 27, 201, the Defendant participated in the “fourth bus demonstration” with 2,500 university students and members of the BF as well as 2,500 university students, etc. Around August 27, 2011, the Defendant occupied the lane in the direction of the independence of Seodaemun-gu Seoul National Police Agency, and occupied the lane in the direction of the independence.

On the ground that the demonstration was not reported, the head of the same police station and the head of the same police station delegated by the head of the Seoul Seodaemun-gu Police Station, around 23:49 on the same day, around 23:54 on the same day, and around 00:03 on the 28th of the same month, did not dissolve without delay even after the third dispersion order was issued.

B. The Defendant is above the general traffic obstruction.

As described in the port, from August 27, 201 to 00:30 on August 28, 201, the vehicle was occupied from around 22:0 on August 27, 201 and the vehicle was prevented.

Accordingly, the defendant, together with 2,500 persons who participated in the demonstration, interfered with the traffic of the land for about 3 hours.

3. As seen earlier, the grounds for appeal by the defendant lawfully submitted within the period for submitting the grounds for appeal are unfair sentencing, but the appellate court may ex officio decide on the grounds that affect the judgment, even if not included in the grounds for appeal (Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act), and examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant.

A. As to the violation of the Assembly and Demonstration Act, 1) Assembly and Demonstration Act (hereinafter “Act”)

The head of the competent police authority under Article 20 (1) shall hold any of the following assemblies: