The Defendant thought to prevent the entrance of the “G” elderly medical care center, which is operated by the injured party by borrowing the replacement work, etc. of the Japanese water supply center.

On August 21, 2016, at around 07:40 on August 21, 2016, the Defendant obstructed the Defendant’s work for three hours to prevent the patient H (89 years old) hospitalized in the hospital by force from being hospitalized in the hospital by preventing cement paths leading to the hospital care center for the aged by using felers, stones, etc. at the vicinity of the entrance of the hospital for the elderly at the 'G in Kimcheon-si, Kimcheon-si.'.

2. In the case of an ordinary concurrent relationship under Article 40 of the Criminal Act, res judicata of the final and conclusive judgment on one of them extends to other crimes (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2017Do11687, Sept. 21, 2017). According to the records, the Defendant may recognize the fact that the final and conclusive summary order was issued on February 2, 2017 by being sentenced to a fine of KRW 3 million for interference with general traffic obstruction with the operation of cement paths by blocking cement paths by using divers, stones, etc. as mentioned above in the Daegu District Court Decision 201Da8090, Sept. 21, 2017.

As such, insofar as a summary order has become final and conclusive as to a general traffic obstruction in relation to the facts charged in the instant case, res judicata effect of such summary order also extends to the facts charged in the instant case.

Therefore, in regard to the facts charged in this case, acquittal shall be sentenced pursuant to Article 326 subparagraph 1 of the Criminal Procedure Act.