The judgment below

The part against Defendant I and the part against Defendant L, respectively, shall be reversed.

Defendant

I. .

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant H, I, N, and W1 misunderstanding of the legal principles) The part concerning interference with general traffic as indicated in paragraph 4 of the facts constituting the crime of the lower judgment (Defendant H, I, N,W) Defendant H, I, N, and W participating in the assembly and demonstration held in the lower judgment, and the fourth line road set back in front of and after the CL parking lot, which were lawfully reported, did not have any awareness or intention to interfere with traffic by occupying the said road to the said Defendants.

In addition, even if the assembly and demonstration in the judgment of the court below was an illegal assembly and demonstration beyond the reported scope and became the object of the order of dispersion by the police, the above Defendants, who were merely the general participants, could not be aware of such circumstances. Therefore, the above Defendants did not have any awareness or intent to obstruct traffic by such unlawful assembly and demonstration.

Nevertheless, the court below found all of the charges guilty. The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles of general traffic obstruction, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B) The part of the charge of violation of the Assembly and Demonstration Act as stated in the judgment of the court below (Defendant N) committed by Defendant N at the time of the assembly and demonstration as stated in the judgment of the court below is merely an assembly tool (means for expression of opinion) and it does not constitute an organization that may threaten a person's life or inflict bodily harm as stated in the judgment of the court below. However, the court below found Defendant N guilty of this part of the charge on the ground that only the head of only the above defendant cited constitutes an organization that may threaten a person's life or inflict bodily harm. Thus, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles of the crime of violation of the Assembly and Demonstration Act.

C) Each assembly listed in Article 13 of the Criminal facts in the holding of the court below, which was held by Defendant I, for violation of the Assembly and Demonstration Act as stated in Article 13 of the Criminal facts in the holding of the court below.