Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 500,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

2. In the instant facts charged at the trial, the ex officio determination prosecutor filed an application for changes in the indictment with the content that “A is the nominal owner of the C registration, and the Defendant is the nominal owner of the C (Partially used as a road) and that “from March 3, 2017 to July 12, 2017,” respectively, changed the term “from March 3, 2017 to July 3, 2017” from among the facts charged in the instant case to “the actual owner of the land in question,” and the lower judgment cannot be maintained as it changed the subject matter of the adjudication by permitting it.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the judgment below is reversed and it is again decided as follows.

[Dao-written Judgment] Criminal facts B is the nominal owner of the registration in Pcheon-si C (Partially used as a road) and the defendant is the actual owner of the above land.

From March 3, 2017 to July 12, 2017, the Defendant obstructed the flow of land on the side through which ordinary vehicles pass by locked by locked by creating gates at the edge of the said road, and gates at the front part of the said road.

Summary of Evidence

1. The defendant's oral statement in court;

1. Witnesses D and E's respective legal statements;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on each field photograph, a certified copy of the cadastral map, a land cadastre, and a satellite photograph;

1. Article 185 of the Criminal Act and Article 185 of the same Act concerning criminal facts and the choice of fines;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act Article 334(1) of the provisional payment order is that the defendant has a large burden of causing inconvenience to neighbors by installing pents on the road.

However, it is favorable that the defendant has accepted all errors in the past in the trial, and the intention that the defendant does not want the punishment is submitted by the unanimous agreement with the complainant.