Considering that participants in assembly and demonstration on the sea can
manifest their own personality, supplement democratic justification under
representative democracy and protect the minority by opening assembly or
demonstration and that an effect of assembly or demonstration against ludicrous
statements related to Dokdo will be maximized when opened rather on the sea
than on land, the place on the sea is pertinent to the protected area of freedom
of assembly.
On the other hand, it is valid to apply law on assembly and demonstration to
peaceful assembly and demonstration on the sea. For, the place on the sea is
pertinent to ‘where general people can pass through freely’ out of Article 2,
Clause 2 of law on assembly and demonstration since most of participants in
assembly and demonstration on the sea don’t use large-scale ships besides hybrid
vessel. And it is pertinent to ‘Behaviors which have an effect on diverse
unspecific people’s opinions or control them by showing power and force to
others’ out of Article 2, Clause 2 of law on assembly and demonstration since,
if participants in assembly and demonstration on the sea argue their common
opinions by moving a lot of ships on the sea at once, it will have an effect on
diverse unspecific people. Therefore, it is reasonable to apply assembly and
demonstration on the sea to law on assembly and demonstration in the present.
However, it is invalid to restrict or regulate assembly and demonstration on
the sea by applying sea related laws such as public order in open ports act and sea traffic safety act enacted to protect sea traffic since it restricts freedom of
assembly by sea related laws with different purpose of legislation, which restricts
natural rights in constitution which is freedom of assembly without clearly stated
ground law.