Civil disobedience is a catalyst for overthrowing bad governments, the right way. It is even more justified in a democracy because now the people are nonviolently disobeying a government that is supposed to be run by the people. If people are protesting to themselves, then who is the government really run by.
In a democratic society the practice of civil disobedience is perfectly justified. There are times when the normal channels are ineffective, inaccessible, or unresponsive. At times like these alternative approaches become necessary. Without civil disobedience the United States could not have made the progress that it has in the twentieth century.
In my opinion, a person is allowed to exercise civil disobedience when necessary. For example, when Rosa Parks exercised her right of free speech several hundred years ago, she was persecuted for it. However, it was the right thing to do. She stood up for what she believed was right. When a person disagrees with an unjust law, it should perfectly be okay.
I believe civil disobedience can be morally justified in a democratic society. Civil disobedience generally has to do with a citizen refusing to follow a certain law or refusing to pay taxes, as a way to protest. I believe people who do this should expect punishment and be ready to speak out in court as to why they did it. If they can't do this, then they shouldn't consider their decision moral.
No, I do not think that civil disobedience in a democratic society is morally justified, because one person's freedom fighter is another person's terrorist. If the rest of us have decided what the law should be, a person should follow it. If they do not like it, they can always try to change the law.