The judgment below

Part concerning Defendant D, E, and F shall be reversed, respectively.

Defendant

D. E. F. Each fine of KRW 1,000,000.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. As to the violation of the Assembly and Demonstration Act (hereinafter “the Assembly and Demonstration Act”), there was no violence in the process of the assembly in this case, and since the participants in the assembly were short of time to occupy the road, it cannot be deemed that the assembly in this case poses a danger to the legal interests of others or public peace and order.

Therefore, the assembly of this case cannot be deemed an assembly subject to dispersion order.

② As to the violation of the Assembly and Demonstration Act, in order to establish a crime of violation of the Assembly and Demonstration Act due to the failure to comply with the order of dispersion, the chief of a police station, etc. shall request the closure declaration of assembly, voluntary dispersion, and three times a dispersion order pursuant to the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes, and the reasons for dispersion shall be specifically notified at each relevant stage. However, the reason for dissolution was not notified at the time when

Therefore, the Defendants do not constitute a crime of violation of the Assembly and Demonstration Act due to the violation of dispersion order.

③ As to the general traffic obstruction in the decision of the court below, the Defendants merely attended the reported assembly and driven on the road according to the instruction of the host party, and therefore there was no intention to interfere with the general traffic obstruction.

B. Each sentence of the lower court on the Defendants on the unfair sentencing (Defendant A, Defendant C: each fine of one million won, Defendant D, E, and F: each fine of two million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles by the Defendants

A. In light of the purport of the report system under Article 16(4)3 of the Assembly and Demonstration Act, whether the instant assembly is subject to dispersion order, the issue of whether an outdoor assembly or demonstration actually held constitutes “an act clearly deviating from the scope of reported purpose, date, time, place, method, etc.” under Article 16(4)3 of the same Act.