2015 High Court Order 246 Violation of the Assembly and Demonstration Act

1 A

2 B

C. C. 3

4 丁

5 . 戊

Park Young-young (prosecutions) and Park Jong-young (Public Trial)

Law Firm Inn (private ships for all of the defendants)

Attorney Park Jong-ok in charge

August 27, 2015

The Defendants are not guilty.

1. Summary of the facts charged

피고인 甲은 전국교직원노동조합 ( 이하 ' 전교조 ) 수석부위원장 , 피고인 乙은 전교조 유치원위원회 위원장 , 피고인 丙는 전교조 유치원위원회 부위원장 , 피고인 丁은 전교조 회원 , 피고인 戊은 전교조 충남유치원위원회 위원장이다 .

From January 28, 2014: From around 00 to around Sejong Special Self-Governing City, Defendants: (a) had 800 members in front of Sejong Special Self-Governing City, and (b) had been holding an assembly to the effect that “the withdrawal of guidelines for forced classes for five hours per day of kindergarten curriculum” requires the withdrawal of their requirements, and (c) had all participants enter the Ministry of Education in order to fulfill their requirements; (d) from around 18:30, the Defendants got out of the Ministry of Education according to the line installed in the vicinity of the assembly.

18:33 on the same day, even though the Sejong Police Station guard and the head of A, who was in charge of the assembly management at the above location, sent a warning that the maintenance line would be punished if the police vehicle would be invaded by the police vehicle, the Defendants moved about 3 meters to the face of the Ministry of Education beyond the maintenance line in front of the latter part of the above Ministry of Education at around 18:40.

As a result, the Defendants, despite the police officer’s warning, committed an offence of the order keeping line without any justifiable reason.

2. Determination

A. The Defendants and the defense counsel asserted that the establishment of the order keeping line was illegal since they were not notified of the establishment of the order keeping line as stated in the facts charged. In this regard, the Defendants and the defense counsel examined it.

B. Article 24 subparag. 3 of the Assembly and Demonstration Act provides that a police officer's order maintenance line established pursuant to Article 13 shall be punished for a considerable time without any justifiable reason, notwithstanding a police officer's warning. Article 13(1) of the same Act provides that "the head of the competent police authority who has received a report pursuant to Article 6(1) of the same Act may set a line for maintenance of order within the minimum scope of protection and public order at the time of the assembly and demonstration." Article 13(2) of the same Act provides that a police officer shall notify the organizer or person in charge of liaison when he/she sets a line for maintenance of order pursuant to Article 13(1) of the same Act. In addition, Article 13(2) of the Enforcement Decree of the Assembly and Demonstration Act provides that a notice of the establishment of a line for maintenance of order pursuant to Article 13(2) of the Act must be given in writing if a national police officer changes the line to the situation of the assembly or demonstration.

C. In full view of the witness’s each legal statement, CD’s images, the assembly site level, and the copy of the outdoor assembly report, the following facts are recognized.

The assembly in which the Defendants participated was launched from the Ministry of Education on January 28, 2014 at the end of 00:00. The participants installed a stage in the direction of the Ministry of Education in the front of the air space. At the Sejong Police Station, the assembly participants set up a line in the self-form of 1 "one line of maintenance of order, which is short of the front line of the stage after the stage, from the beginning of the assembly to the end of the public space (hereinafter referred to as "one line of maintenance of order,") and the stage.

At around 17:00 to 18:00 on the same day, the following day: (a) there was a defect that the conference participants saw candlelight and do so; (b) four police officials ordered by the Sejong Police Station security guard and traffic division set up two-time maintenance lines and two-time maintenance lines in the way of maintenance of order, namely, the maintenance of order order order order order lines from the tin, in a form of plastic line (hereinafter referred to as “three-dimensional maintenance lines”); (c) the head of the Sejong Police Station guard and the head of the Sejong Police Station continued a public announcement that the line was set up more than the line of order at the site; and (d) no public announcement was given that the line of order maintenance was newly set up on three occasions. Moreover, the two-time line of order maintenance in the report on the outdoor assembly book was set up at a corner or a telephone, and the two-time line of order maintenance was set at a corner.

D. According to the provisions of the Enforcement Decree of the above Act, if the rate of violation of the Assembly and Demonstration Act due to the violation of the order keeping line was set lawfully in accordance with the above Act and the Enforcement Decree, the chief of a police station must inform the person who held the meeting of the establishment of the order keeping line or the person in charge of liaison. The evidence proving that the chief of a police authority notified the establishment of the order keeping line at the time of establishment of the order keeping line No. 1 and No. 2, the information officer stated that the notice of establishment of the order keeping line was given to the organizer in writing. The witness Kim ****. The notice of establishment of the order keeping line was not submitted as evidence, and the person who presented the notice of establishment of the order keeping line was not examined, and the person in charge of the meeting set up the order keeping line was not lawfully established, and there was no further evidence to prove that the Defendants did not lawfully establish the order keeping order at the time of establishment of the order keeping line No. 2, as seen earlier.

Judges relocation year;