일반교통방해
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that each place where the Defendant set up and parked a car (hereinafter “each of the places of appeal in this case”) did not correspond to the land offered to many and unspecified persons, and there is no fact that traffic has been obstructed by the Defendant’s above act.
2. Determination
A. The purpose of Article 185 of the Criminal Act is to punish all acts of causing damage to, or interference with traffic by causing damage to, the land access, etc. or causing substantial difficulty in traffic by other means. Here, the term “land access” refers to a wide range of the passage of land actually used for the traffic of the general public, and the ownership relation of the site, traffic right relation, or heavy and sound, etc. are not prohibited (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2001Do6903, Apr. 26, 2002; 2006Do9418, Mar. 15, 2007).
The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, namely, ① the Defendant’s Do referred purchased land in Gwangju City E, H, and F around 202. Each of the instant places (except the part located on the I’s land) was the asphalt package as the only road leading to the village into the same village, and at least 190s were offered for the passage of neighboring residents and vehicles, and ② the Defendant was in possession of each of the instant places on the ground that the part located at H (Road Name C: Gwangju City) in Gwangju City, on June 4, 2013. At around 15:00, the Defendant laid down approximately 1m in diameter at the edge of the instant place at around June 15:00, 201, which affected the passage of the instant place on the ground that the part of the instant place was located on June 17, 2013. < Amended by Act No. 11873, Jun. 17, 2013>