먼저 최근 2009년 5월 19일에 최병국 의원이 대표로 발의한 집회 및 시위에 관한 법률 개정안은 질서유지선을 설정할 수 있는 경우를 규정하는 것이 집회의 자유를 제한하는데 있어 본질적인 요소에 해당하기 때문에 법률에 규정하는 것이 타당하며, 죄형법정주의의 원칙상 동 개정안에서처럼 집회 및 시위에 관한 법률에서 질서유지선을 설정할 수 있는 경우를 규정하는 것이 타당하다. 다음으로 최근 2009년 5월 13일에 진성호 의원이 대표로 발의한 집회 및 시위에 관한 법률 개정안에서 규정하고 있는 ‘심각한 피해’라는 법문은 너무 애매모호하여 명확성의 원칙에 반하기 때문에 타당하지 않다. 또한 진성호 의원이 대표로 발의한 동 개정안에서처럼 집회 및 시위에 관한 법률상 관할경찰관서장이 아닌 문화재청장이 다수 사용자 간의 이해관계 조정의 필요범위 내에서, 그리고 문화재의 보존을 위한 최소필요의 범위 내에서 허가를 해 주도록 하는 것이 타당하다. 끝으로 최근 2009년 5월 13일에 강기정 의원이 대표로 발의한 집회 및 시위에 관한 법률 개정안은 집회자의 집회의 자유와 초상권 및 개인정보자기결정권을 보호하기 위한 것으로 비례의 원칙에 합치되기 때문에 타당하다.

First of all, the latest revised bill of law on assembly and demonstration, proposed by Choe Byeong-guk, a member of the National Assembly as the representative on May 19, 2009, is valid constitutionally since the scope of event place for freedom of assembly may unjustly restricted due to creation of maintenance line of order, to define the case of creation of maintenance line of order is applied to essential elements in the restriction of basic rights such as freedom of assembly. Next, the latest revised bill of law on assembly and demonstration, proposed by Jin Seong-ho, a member of the National Assembly as the representative on May 13, 2009, is not valid constitutionally by the following reason. In other words the foresaid revised bill of the words of serious damage herein is too vague so it is contrary to void for vagueness doctrine. And the foresaid revised bill is valid for Head of the Cultural Properties Administration to permit within the scope of adjustment of interests between the majority users and the scope of minimum requirement to protect the cultural properties. Last, the latest revised bill of law on assembly and demonstration, proposed by Kang Gi-jeong, a member of the National Assembly as the representative on May 13, 2009, is valid constitutionally by the following reason. it is agreed with the principle of balancing test to protect freedom of assembly, the right of likeness, and right to self-determination of private information.

First of all, the latest revised bill of law on assembly and demonstration, proposed by Choe Byeong-guk, a member of the National Assembly as the representative on May 19, 2009, is valid constitutionally since the scope of event place for freedom of assembly may unjustly restricted due to creation of maintenance line of order, to define the case of creation of maintenance line of order is applied to essential elements in the restriction of basic rights such as freedom of assembly. Next, the latest revised bill of law on assembly and demonstration, proposed by Jin Seong-ho, a member of the National Assembly as the representative on May 13, 2009, is not valid constitutionally by the following reason. In other words the foresaid revised bill of the words of serious damage herein is too vague so it is contrary to void for vagueness doctrine. And the foresaid revised bill is valid for Head of the Cultural Properties Administration to permit within the scope of adjustment of interests between the majority users and the scope of minimum requirement to protect the cultural properties. Last, the latest revised bill of law on assembly and demonstration, proposed by Kang Gi-jeong, a member of the National Assembly as the representative on May 13, 2009, is valid constitutionally by the following reason. it is agreed with the principle of balancing test to protect freedom of assembly, the right of likeness, and right to self-determination of private information.

, , , , , ,

The Revised Bill of Law on Assembly and Demonstration, Creation of maintenance line of order, Principle of legal saving, Permission of Cultural Heritage Administration head, Photographing and Recording of the police, Void for vagueness doctrine, Principle of balancing test