The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances in light of the gists of the grounds for appeal, it can be sufficiently recognized that the Defendant was interfering with traffic by participating in an assembly of the General Federation of the National Democratic Workers' Unions (hereinafter “General Union”) on April 24, 2015 and September 23, 2015, recognizing that it was illegal assembly and occupying the road along with other participants at the assembly site, without recognizing that it was illegal assembly.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the Defendant of the facts charged of this case is erroneous by misapprehending the legal principles.

A. On April 24, 2015, it is recognized that the participants in the assembly, such as construction labor union, etc., from around 16:45 on April 24, 2015 at the time of the outdoor assembly report (Evidence No. 25 to 38 of the evidence record) and photographs (Evidence No. 42 to 47, 69-192 of the evidence record) at the meeting, etc., the civil labor union began to go at the intersection from around 16:45 on April 24, 2015 to the intersection from around 17:16 at around 17:16 at the above parallel, and the participants in the assembly, such as construction labor union, etc., leave the intersection and trying to enter the intersection in a fair direction, etc., significantly deviate from the scope of the report or seriously violates the terms and conditions of the assembly.

2) According to the photograph taken by the defendant who participated in the assembly (Evidence No. 62, 66, 67 of the evidence record), it is clear that the defendant involved in the assembly was located between the participants in the assembly who participated in the above assembly and occupy the intersection by the end of 1,00, and it is obvious that the traffic has a significant difficult situation due to occupying the road along with other participants in the assembly.

3) In addition, in light of the fact that the Defendant was a public-private partnership member H (Evidence No. 52 of the evidence record) and that there were several occasions of punishment by participating in illegal assemblies even before the instant case, the Defendant was aware that the said assembly was an illegal assembly that considerably deviates from the reported scope or seriously violates the conditions.

B. On September 23, 2015, an outdoor assembly of the Noh class General of the People's Republic of Korea (1).