The judgment of the first instance is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by a fine of 500,000 won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. The gist of the grounds of appeal is as follows: First, the facts charged of this case is not specified because there is no specific description of the crime of violation of the Assembly and Demonstration Act and the general traffic obstruction order; thus, the prosecution should be dismissed.

Second, even based on the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, there is a violation of the rules of evidence recognizing the obstruction of general traffic and an error of mistake of facts by paying attention to the fact that the defendant was arrested at the assembly site only though the defendant was arrested at the assembly site.

Third, even if the defendant participated in a demonstration after his own ruling, it is very likely that it would be harmful to the surrounding environment and there is no need to punish the defendant. However, the first instance court erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the violation of the Assembly and Demonstration Act, thereby convicting the defendant.

2. The summary of the facts charged of this case’s judgment on the grounds of appeal is as indicated in the judgment of the court of first instance: (a) the so-called candlelight assembly and demonstration against the import of U.S. beef from around May 2008; and (b) on June 29, 2008, the Seoul Square and paper, and the Seoul Square, B, and C, B, and C, with a maximum of 1,90 persons who participate in the demonstration until the new wall was arrested on the street of Jung-gu, Seoul, Seoul, and the Defendant participated in the so-called candlelight demonstration on June 30, 200 to 03:20; and (c) at the same time, the Defendant participated in an outdoor demonstration after being arrested on the street of the EF household in Seoul, Jung-gu, Seoul, with those participating in the assembly, and it is impossible to communicate nearby 1-ro 1, 200, 32-2, and 3-3 vehicles.

As above, regarding the violation of the Assembly and Demonstration Act by participation in an outdoor demonstration after self-determination, and the violation of the Assembly and Demonstration Act by participation in an outdoor assembly and demonstration due to the traffic obstruction by occupying roads for the purpose of demonstration.