2. If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

On December 3, 2013, at around 08:00, the Defendant removed two covers the number of the land on which the said land C is owned by the Defendant, using sckes, on the ground that it is owned by the Defendant, and then he stockpiled the traffic of many and unspecified persons by piling up about 60 cm in height and about 5 m in length.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness D, E, F, and G;

1. Application of the respective Acts and subordinate statutes to each photograph, internal report (general traffic obstruction), descriptions in the cadastral map, or images;

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

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

1. The reason for conviction of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is a crime of interference with general traffic under Article 185 of the Criminal Act, the legal interest of which is the protection of the general traffic safety of the general public. The term “land access” refers to a place of public traffic, namely, a place of public nature in which many and unspecified persons, vehicles, and horses are allowed to freely pass through without any specific person, and as long as it is recognized as land, the ownership relation of the site, traffic right relation, or passage relation or heavy and hostileness of traffic users are not prohibited.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2001Do6903 Decided April 26, 2002, etc.). According to the health team and the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court, the road of this case is a road used by farmers who cultivate nearby farmland as well as D, H, and I residing in neighboring houses, and at least ten years ago. Thus, it is reasonable to view the road of this case as a public place with a public nature where many and unspecified persons or vehicles and horses can freely pass through, and thus, it constitutes “land” as provided in Article 185 of the Criminal Act.

In addition, according to the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, the defendant is in color in the cadastral map 93 of the so-called "the first step" investigation records.