All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

The summary of the grounds for appeal recognizes the fact that the defendant was driven by the defendant while occupying the lane as shown in the facts charged in this case. However, since the defendant attended the assembly held in the judgment of the court below (hereinafter referred to as the "Assembly of this case") and the police wall installed at the place of assembly at the time of commencement with other participants in the assembly at the time of commencement of the movement with others, it was not possible for the defendant to interfere with the traffic of the vehicle.

The Defendant, as a simple participant of the instant assembly, committed a direct act that may cause traffic obstruction on the sole basis of the fact that he/she was engaged in with other participants in the assembly.

In addition, in light of the details and degree of participation, the defendant shall not be held liable for a joint principal offender with respect to the general traffic obstruction.

The police officers did not take a disciplinary measure against the assembly of this case and protected the participants of the assembly of this case. However, the police officer's taking pictures of the defendant who was under way by the police officer constitutes a naval investigation, and thus, the photograph collected by the police officer cannot be used as evidence.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty on the facts charged of this case based on the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, including the above photographic photo.

The punishment sentenced by the court below (700,000 won) is too unhued and unfair.

Judgment

In light of the legislative intent of Article 6(1) of the Assembly and Demonstration Act (hereinafter “the Act”) and Article 6(1) of the Act on Assembly and Demonstration regarding the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts, the traffic of the road may be limited in cases of an assembly or demonstration on the road after completing lawful reports under the Act on Assembly and Demonstration. As such, even if the assembly or demonstration was conducted within the reported scope or conducted differently from the reported contents, the reported scope is significant.