beta
Text
Defendant
All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.
Reasons
1. Reasons for appeal;
A. Defendant 1’s mistake of facts and misapprehension of the legal doctrine did not have participated in a prior assembly from November 14, 2015 to 15:30, and the Defendant merely participated in an assembly reported at the W lane from 15:20 to 16:10, and was engaged in a direct act causing traffic obstruction.
In addition, it cannot be seen that the traffic has been obstructed by the defendant's act because the vehicle was already controlled by the installation of a police wall before the defendant participated.
subsection (b) of this section.
2) The sentence of the lower court that is unfair in sentencing (one million won in penalty) is too unreasonable.
B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. As to the Defendant’s assertion of misunderstanding the facts and legal principles, the purpose of the crime of interference with general traffic under Article 185 of the Criminal Act is to punish all acts that make it impossible or considerably difficult to pass by causing damage to land, road, etc. or interfering with traffic by other means, and the crime of interference with general traffic is an abstract dangerous crime, which makes it impossible or considerably difficult to pass by by means of traffic, and the result of interference with traffic does not require actual occurrence (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2004Do7545, Oct. 28, 2005). In addition, in light of Article 6(1) and legislative intent of the Assembly and Demonstration Act and Article 6(1) of the Assembly and Demonstration Act, if a lawful report is made on the road, the traffic restriction may be limited to a certain extent if the road is conducted within the reported scope, or if it is considerably different from reported matters. Thus, the interference with traffic was received due to the failure to interfere with the road.
Even if there are no special circumstances, it cannot be deemed that a crime of interference with general traffic under Article 185 of the Criminal Act is established.
, however, that;