일반교통방해
The defendant shall be innocent.
1. On January 29, 2014, around 13:19, the Defendant: (a) obstructed the traffic of land by allowing unspecified people, motor vehicles, and horses to freely pass through, on the ground that D, a private village on a concrete road with a width of about 40 meters, approximately 2.5 meters, located in C, and D, a private village, used the above road for at least ten (10) years on a concrete road owned by the Defendant.
2. The Defendant’s gist of the defense counsel’s change does not constitute “land passage” of the crime of interference with general traffic.
3. The crime of interference with general traffic under Article 185 of the Criminal Act is an offense, the legal interest of which is the protection of the general public’s traffic safety. The term “land access” refers to a place of public traffic by the general public, i.e., a place of public nature where an unspecified number of people, vehicles, or horses are allowed to freely pass
(See Supreme Court Decision 2009Do1376 Decided February 25, 2010, etc.). As to the instant case, the following circumstances acknowledged by the records, namely, ① a part of the Defendant’s existing passage roads between the Defendant’s house and D’s house, is a road newly opened at his own expense for the purpose of leaving the Defendant’s house and using it as access to his own house, ② a house in fact connected with D’s house is the only house. D’s house is located at a place different from the end of the passage of the instant case, ③ even according to D’s testimony, the latter cannot go back through D’s house. Moreover, the point where the Defendant installed a h pipe with the Defendant’s view to the entry of the instant house and the passage of the instant case, and the Defendant’s access to the house, other than those of D’s people, is adjacent to D’s house.