[Defendant A and B] Defendants are innocent, and the summary of the judgment against Defendants is published.

[Defendant C] Defendant C]

Punishment of the crime

The defendants are members of the cargo solidarity headquarters (hereinafter referred to as the "cargo solidarity"), which is an organization affiliated with the general public transportation labor union of the National Democratic Trade Union (hereinafter referred to as "the defendant's status and case background").

On August 30, 2016, the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs announced the "plan for the development of the cargo market" containing the contents of granting new permission to an individual cargo vehicle less than 1.5 tons and a cargo vehicle directly operated by less than 1.5 tons (not less than 20 vehicles owned) for the purpose of resolving the shortage of the vehicle in the apartment transport market and supporting small-scale business start-up. On the other hand, the Ministry of Transport and Maritime Affairs announced the "plan for the development of the cargo market" which includes the contents of granting new permission to a new cargo vehicle under the direct management of less than 1.5 tons. On the other hand, the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs asserted against the cargo vehicle increase and the maintenance of the existing supply and demand control system, and had the members of the cargo joint transport association gather together on the cargo market from October 10, 2016 to October 19, 2016.

〔 범죄사실〕 피고인 C는 다른 화물연대 회원들 약 1,200명과 함께 2016. 10. 10. 15:00 경 부산 강서구 부산 신 항 삼거리 부근 도로에서 화물연대 집회에 참가하던 중, 화물연대 G을 제압하려 던 부산지방 경찰청 H 소속 경찰관 I의 복부를 발로 1회 걷어찼다.

Accordingly, the defendant assaulted police officers to interfere with legitimate performance of duties concerning the maintenance of order at the assembly and demonstration site of police officers, and disrupted order by violence, etc. as a participant of the assembly.

Summary of Evidence

1. Legal statements of I and J;

1. Statement made to I by the police;

1. The Defendant and the defense counsel on the assertion of the Defendant and the defense counsel regarding the admissibility of the act indicated in the facts charged, and the legality of the performance of official duties by the victimized police officer, however, it is sufficient to find the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in the instant case in full view of all the evidence revealed in the summary of the evidence above. Therefore, the above assertion is