일반교통방해
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. In light of the fact that the mother of D and D used the instant land as the only way for the complainant to use it from several hundreds of years ago, and F also can easily access his dry field through the instant land, the instant land constitutes the land stipulated in the general traffic obstruction.
Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment, which acquitted the Defendant of the facts charged.
2. Determination
A. The Defendant’s summary of the instant facts charged from April 18, 2012
4. From the land of this case until December 22, the remaining part of the road of 2.5 meters wide, excluding the degree of 5-60 centimeters wide from the road of this case, on the ground that the land of this case is one’s own ownership, thereby hindering the traffic of the land along which F (NN residents, including ordinary vehicles, victims D, E, etc.) passes through the ordinary vehicle, victim D, etc.
B. The court below found the Defendant not guilty of the charges of this case under the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to conclude that the land of this case constitutes a land where many unspecified persons or vehicles and horses pass through, and that there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. The court below found the Defendant guilty of the charges of this case under the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to conclude that the land of this case constitutes a land where many unspecified persons or vehicles and horses pass through, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.