All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Error of facts and misapprehension of legal principles were removed from the Diplomatic Association, and they were not affiliated with the D Educational Association, and even if so, H wood progressed as unauthorized separation, regardless of the D Educational Association's dental principles, so H wood did not have the authority to make worships and teachings in the D Educational Association's distribution of weddings.

In addition, H's worship was carried out by themselves without prior notice, and as the defendants' entry and exit did not take place in the stage of towing or preparation, it does not constitute a crime of interference with worship.

B. The court below's decision on the unfair sentencing is unfair because each of the punishments imposed by the court below on the defendants is too unreasonable.

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

A. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged based on each of the evidence indicated in its holding.

B. Disturbing the obstruction of worship under Article 158 of the Criminal Act in the judgment of the political party does not necessarily require any act of interference in the course of the execution of tugboats, etc., and even in the case of being conducted at the preparation stage closely related to the execution of tugboats in time (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 81Do2691, Feb. 23, 1982). Even in a case where a person, other than a delegated officer who takes the regular procedure, gives a snow and gives a worship contrary to the resolution of the party meeting, his/her towing and the execution of worship are worth protecting under the Criminal Act, and thus, the obstruction of worship is established even in a case where he/she conducts an act of hindering the peace in the execution of worship and the delivery of tugboats, barring any special circumstance.

(See Supreme Court Decision 71Do1465 Decided September 28, 1971, Supreme Court Decision 2004Do6813 Decided June 29, 2006, Supreme Court Decision 2008Do840 Decided May 29, 2008, etc.). The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court and the trial, i.e., (i) A church on March 12, 2017.