Supreme Court: Outdoor performances and press conferences using amplifiers require prior notification as outdoor assemblies

[Asia Economy Reporter Kim Hyung-min] The Supreme Court has ruled that even if a press conference was held for the media, if it involved performances using microphones and amplifiers outdoors in a situation where an unspecified number of people could see and hear, it should be considered an outdoor assembly subject to prior notification.

The Supreme Court's 3rd Division (Presiding Justice No Tae-ak) overturned the lower court's acquittal and sent the case back to the Seoul Southern District Court with a guilty verdict in the appeal trial of Mr. A, who was prosecuted for violating the Assembly and Demonstration Act, the court announced on the 10th.

The court stated, "At that time, the slogans and performances were directed not only at reporters but also at an unspecified number of citizens, so it is clear that it constitutes an outdoor assembly."

Regarding the lower court's ruling that it could not be definitively considered a reportable event because there was no traffic obstruction, the court pointed out, "Just because there was no risk to public peace and order does not mean that there was no need for prior prevention."

Mr. A was indicted for hosting a "Press Conference Urging the Resignation of Representative Lee Jung-hyun" in front of the former Saenuri Party headquarters in Yeouido in December 2016 without prior notification.

To hold an outdoor assembly or demonstration, one must notify the head of the competent police station between 30 days and 48 hours before the event starts.

Mr. A and about ten others conducted the press conference by reading a pre-distributed statement. They performed acts mocking former Representative Lee and shouted slogans using broadcasting equipment during the conference.

The first trial sentenced Mr. A to a fine of 500,000 won, ruling that the event should be considered an outdoor assembly subject to notification.

On the other hand, the second trial acquitted Mr. A, citing that there was no problem with vehicle traffic at the time and stating, "Unless it causes conflicts between participants and the general public to a significant degree, it cannot be definitively considered an outdoor assembly subject to prior notification."

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.