logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2017.08.24 2017노692
일반교통방해등
Text

All appeals filed by prosecutors and defendants are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. On March 28, 2015, in relation to Defendant 1’s mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, Defendant 1 left the scope of the report and took a way in the direction of Marpo 1, 2015 (hereinafter “instant driving”).

However, the defendant did not have any direct and intentional act causing traffic interference as a simple participant in the assembly.

In addition, the Defendant did not know the scope of the assembly report and did not have a perception that traffic interfered with the traffic because he was driven by the guide of the people (at the time, the police did not provide any guidance to the participants in the assembly, but rather controlled vehicles for the safety of the participants in the assembly). The lower court cited the facts about the process of the Defendant’s participation in the assembly or the degree of involvement in the assembly, and erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the requirements for establishment of general traffic interference.

B) With respect to the violation of the Assembly and Demonstration Act and the violation of the dispersion order in relation to the assembly on May 2, 2015 (hereinafter “instant assembly”) and the refusal to comply with the dispersion order, the requirement of “where the pertinent assembly clearly poses a direct danger to public peace and order” should be satisfied.

Even if an assembly is held at a place where assembly is prohibited, the order to dissolve the assembly is not fulfilled separately, as long as the above requirements are not met.

The lower court determined otherwise by misapprehending the facts or misapprehending the legal doctrine.

2) The punishment sentenced by the lower court (three million won in penalty) is too unreasonable.

B. The punishment sentenced by the prosecutor (3 million won) by the court below is too unhued and unjust.

2. Determination on the Defendant’s misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

A. (1) As to the instant progress, a legitimate report is completed in light of Article 6(1) of the Assembly and Demonstration Act (hereinafter “the Act”) and the legislative intent, and the assembly is held on the road.

arrow