If the defendant fails to pay the above fine, 50,000 won shall be one day.

The defendant is a person who is requested by C to recover a mountainous district from the Gyeonggi-gun D forest owned by the Dong.

Although the Defendant knew that the above place is a land connected to E’s house, it obstructed traffic by planting 25gs to the above place on March 26, 2013 on the ground that he received an order to recover a mountainous district from the head of Pyeongtaek-Gun, and installing two meters wides and two meters highs of 1 meter foot fences on both sides of the planting place and allowing the passage of the vehicle.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness E and F;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes, such as certified copies of forestry map, each field photograph, field map, approval of plan for restoration of a place, notification of completion inspection of restoration of a place, the expiration of permission for which the period of permission expires, notification of invalidation of permission and notification of restoration order following the expiration of the period of permission for conversion of mountainous district, supplemental notification following an application for exemption from restoration obligation, cadastral map and actual ground plan, investigation report (including urban construction and interview with

1. Relevant Articles of the Criminal Act and Article 185 of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts;

1. Determination on the assertion of the defendant and his/her defense counsel under Articles 70 and 69(2) of the Criminal Act for the confinement of the workhouse

1. The defendant and his defense counsel asserted that the road of this case does not fall under the ground of obstruction of general traffic with the road used only by E and his family members, and that the defendant's act was in accordance with the notification of restoration order by the head of Pyeongtaek-gun, and there was no intention to commit a crime of obstruction of general traffic.

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. The term "land access" refers to a place of public access to the general public, i.e., a place of public character where many and unspecified people, vehicles, and horses are able to freely pass through without any specific person, and Supreme Court Decision 2005Do1697 Decided August 19, 2005.