집회의 자유를 제한하는 공익으로서 동물보호

While numerous rulings and studies have examined limitations on freedom of assembly as outlined in the Constitution, no research has specifically investigated the potential constraints on use animals as instruments of assembly. Nevertheless, the recent ruling by the Seoul Administrative Court has affirmed that animal protection can be considered a matter of public interest that restricts the freedom of assembly, and appeals for animal protection have been made in numerous comparable instances. This study analyzes the legal rulings etc. made by state agencies in cases involving the use of animals as means. The objective is to assess whether and why the Animal Protection Act, which aims to prevent animal abuse, can be considered a public interest that restricts the freedom of assembly. Moreover, we examined the feasibility of implementing such a constitutional imterpretation within the framework of the current law. While the Constitution does not explicitly mention animal protection, the responsibility to safeguard animals can be inferred from Article 35. Furthermore, limitations on the ways in freedom of assembly can be reasonably imposed in the interest of public welfare. Consequently, the utilization of animals in assembly might be limited as a result of the constitutional imperative to safeguard animal welfare in the public interest. Furthermore, there is a contention that the Assembly and Demonstration Act and the Act on Performance of Duties by Police Officers should be construed in alignment with this objective, necessitating corresponding amendments.