(영문) 인천지방법원 2018.02.21 2016노3997 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 인천지방법원 2018.02.21 2016노3997

일반교통방해

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is innocent. The summary of this judgment shall be notified publicly.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) The Defendant did not engage in any conduct that directly interferes with traffic, and there is no conspiracy with other participants who engaged in such conduct. Thus, the joint principal offender of the public offering cannot be established.

There is a relation between the defendant's participation in the assembly and the interference with traffic in the state where police walls have already been installed.

shall not be deemed to exist.

Therefore, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts charged or by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2) The punishment sentenced by the lower court (an amount of KRW 1.5 million) is too unreasonable.

B. The above-mentioned sentence of the prosecutor is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the Defendant’s misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles

A. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant, who is a co-chairperson of the O trade union, was the co-chairperson of the O trade union, and the participants in the nameless assembly from around 14:00 to from around 19:00 to around 19:00, the Defendant started around the 110 Seoul Square as the Sejong-gu Seoul Central District of Seoul, and opened the front lane to the front road of Jongno-gu, Jongno-gu, Seoul, by occupying the front road along with the 110 Square.

Accordingly, the Defendant conspired with the participants in the assembly and interfered with traffic.

B. The lower court found the Defendant guilty on the charges by taking account of the evidence as indicated in its judgment.

(c)

1) In light of the legislative intent of the Assembly and Demonstration Act (hereinafter “the Assembly Act”), in a case where an assembly or demonstration is conducted on the road after completing a legitimate report, the traffic of the road will be limited to a certain degree. As such, in a case where the assembly or demonstration was conducted within the reported scope or was conducted differently from the reported contents, the traffic of the road was obstructed thereby.

Even if so, special.

참조조문

-집회 및 시위에 관한 법률

유사 판례

-인천지방법원 2018.02.21 2016노4227

-대전지방법원 2017.07.12 2016노3262

-서울서부지방법원 2017.01.12 2016노1300

-대전지방법원 2017.05.25 2016노2823

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.04.27 2016노5328