The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Article 11 subparag. 1 of the Assembly and Demonstration Act (hereinafter “the Assembly and Demonstration Act”) prohibits an outdoor assembly absolutely at a place within 100 meters from the boundary of the National Assembly’s office building. The above provision is a constitutional provision that recognizes the legitimacy of the legislative purpose, the appropriateness of the method, the minimum of infringement and the balance of the legal interests and interests.

However, in violation of the above provision, the defendant participated in an assembly in front of the National Assembly, and does not comply with the legitimate dispersion order by the chief of the competent police station, so the judgment below which acquitted the defendant is erroneous in misapprehension

2. Summary of the facts charged

(a) No person who violates the Assembly and Demonstration Act due to any violation of the Assembly and Demonstration Act shall hold any outdoor assembly or demonstration in a place within one hundred meters from the boundary of the National Assembly building site;

Nevertheless, from 14:25 on the same day to 18:40 on the same day, the Defendant participated in an assembly held at a place within 100 meters from the boundary of the office building of the National Assembly at a place within 10-meter from the National Assembly building boundary of the National Assembly, by participating in the “a joint strike response committee member, a union member, and a union member of the Korea Trade Union,” and participating in the “a public pension opening Dokk Dok Dok Dok Dok Dok Dok Dok

B. The Defendant, in violation of the Assembly and Demonstration Act due to the failure to comply with the order of dispersion, did not comply with the lawful dispersion order without justifiable grounds, even though he participated in the assembly prior to the National Assembly's death, and received lawful dispersion order for five times or more of the head of the Seoul Yeongdeungpo Police Station for the reason of assembly

Accordingly, the Defendant refused to comply with the legitimate dispersion order by the chief of the police station.

3. Determination

A. The Constitutional Court’s decision on the violation of the Assembly and Demonstration Act by participating in an assembly at a place where assembly is prohibited is made on May 31, 2018.