The Defendant: (a) had a mind for obstructing the Defendant from performing the construction of mast concrete removal works carried out by the Victim B in Gyeonggi-gun C; and (b) had the victim interfered with the Defendant’s work by force by parking the Trackers owned by the Defendant on the D road, which is an access road to the said construction site, from October 22, 2019 to October 23, 2019; and (c) had interfered with the Defendant’s work by force.

(1) The Defendant asserted that the Defendant’s act interfered with the victim’s work operation on the grounds that the Defendant left a space to allow large vehicles to pass. However, considering the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by this Court, namely, ① the Defendant’s parking of large-scale vehicles on the way to go through, and the fact that the Defendant’s parking of large-scale vehicles is impossible due to the Defendant’s act, ② the Victim B states that the Defendant’s work was obstructed due to the Defendant’s act. Accordingly, the Defendant’s assertion is rejected) evidence.

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. A police statement statement statement E with respect to B;

1. A list of the supply of ready-mixed concrete and a list of transactions;

1. On-site photographs and satellite photographs;

1. Application of a certified copy of cadastral map;

1. Relevant Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of a fine, and the choice of a fine;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order;