2. The crime of interference with general traffic under Article 185 of the Criminal Act is an offense in which the legal interest of the general traffic safety of the general public is protected, and the term “land access” refers to a place of public access to the general public, i.e., a place of public access where many and unspecified persons, vehicles, and horses are able to freely pass through without limiting to a specific person (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Do1697, Aug. 19, 2005). The ownership relation of the site, traffic right relation, or the traffic right relation, or heavy and hostileness of traffic users (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2001Do6903, Apr. 26, 2002). Meanwhile, the crime is not so abstract dangerous crime, where traffic is impossible or remarkably difficult, and the result of traffic interference is not practically caused.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2004Do7545 Decided October 28, 2005, etc.). According to the evidence duly examined and adopted by the court below, 50.27/158 of the shares of 158 among them were transferred to P and Q, and 20.7/158 was transferred to P and Q.O on September 30, 199, and the defendant was transferred from P and Q to 70.97/158 of the shares of the above O on June 16, 2006. The defendant purchased the surrounding land of this case as the passage of this case on June 12, 2006, and the defendant purchased the shares of 150.97/158 of the shares of the above O to the neighboring land of this case, and the defendant purchased the shares of this case as the owner of the land of this case on June 12, 2006, and operated the GY as the owner of the land of this case.