The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Error of facts and misapprehension of legal principle 1) The Defendant’s act does not make road traffic impossible as stated in the judgment of the first instance court. 2) The Defendant’s act is dismissed as a legitimate act that inevitably occurs while exercising the freedom of assembly and demonstration.

B. The sentencing of the first instance court on the unfair sentencing (one million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Determination of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles as to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts. 1) In a case where two or more persons jointly process a road for a crime where it has become impossible to pass on the road, the conspiracy is not a legally fixed type, but a combination of intent to realize a crime through the joint processing of crimes by two or more persons. Thus, even if there are two or more persons impliedly, a public contest relationship is established if some of the solicitors directly share part of the elements of the crime and do not execute it, in full view of the status and role of them in the whole crime, or control or influence over the progress of the crime, if it is recognized that there is a functional control over another's act through an essential contribution to the crime, not a simple conspiracy, but a functional control over another's act is held as a co-principal (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Do803, Apr. 26, 2007). The first instance court duly adopted the evidence of the evidence at the first instance court's 100th and 7:1000th Ga of the National Bus.