beta
Text
All appeals are dismissed.
Reasons
The grounds of appeal are examined.
1. As to the prosecutor’s grounds of appeal, the Constitutional Court rendered a ruling of inconsistency with the Constitution as to the prosecutor’s grounds of appeal (Article 11 subparag. 1 of the Assembly and Demonstration Act (wholly amended by Act No. 8424, May 11, 2007; hereinafter “the Assembly and Demonstration Act”) and Article 11 subparag. 1 of the Assembly and Demonstration Act (Article 23 of the Assembly and Demonstration Act) and Article 11 of the same Act (Article 11 of the same Act shall not be in conformity with the Constitution). The above provision of the Act shall continue to apply until it was amended by December 31, 2019 (Article 2013Hun-Ba322, 2016Hun-Ba354, 2016Hun-Ba354, 2017Hun-Ba360, 398, 471, 2018Hun-Ga34, 94, and 2018).
The Constitutional Court's ruling of inconsistency with the Constitution is a modified form that does not stipulate the Constitution and the Constitutional Court Act, but is a decision of unconstitutionality on the legal provisions.
(See Supreme Court Decision 2004Do7111 Decided January 15, 2009, Constitutional Court Decision 2003HunGa1, 2004HunGa4 Decided May 27, 2004, etc.). Article 23 Subparag. 3 of the Assembly and Demonstration Act provides that Article 11 of the Assembly and Demonstration Act shall be violated. Article 23 Subparag. 5 of the Assembly and Demonstration Act provides that Article 24 Subparag. 5 of the Assembly and Demonstration Act shall be combined with Article 20(2) and Article 20(1) of the Assembly and Demonstration Act as a constituent element.
( Constitutional Court Order 2015Hun-Ga28, 2016Hun-Ga5 Decided June 28, 2018). Ultimately, Article 11 Subparag. 1 of the Assembly and Demonstration Act is combined with Article 23 Subparag. 3 of the Assembly and Demonstration Act or Article 24 Subparag. 5 of the Assembly and Demonstration Act, and thus, the instant decision of inconsistency with the Constitution is a decision of unconstitutionality as to the penal provisions.
In addition, in cases where the Constitutional Court rendered a decision of unconstitutionality on the provision of penal law in accordance with the main sentence of Article 47(3) of the Constitutional Court Act, the provision becomes retroactively null and void, and thus the court is instituting a public prosecution.