일반교통방해
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that the road where the Defendant installed the steel pipe (hereinafter referred to as the “road of this case”) is owned by the Defendant’s spouse, and the Defendant installed the steel pipe to display the boundary of the land, and thus, the Defendant did not have any intention to obstruct ordinary traffic, and in light of the details of the vehicle ownership by the residents, the steel pipe installed, and the wide size of the road after the Defendant’s act, the lower court convicted the Defendant of the facts charged of this case. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine and misapprehending the legal doctrine.
2. Determination
가. 원심의 판단 원심은, 그 채택 증거를 종합하여 인정되는 다음과 같은 사정 즉, ① 이 사건 도로는 수십 년 전부터 일반 공중의 왕래에 사용되었던 점, ② 5 톤 화물차량 등이 수확한 톳의 운반 등을 위하여 이 사건 도로를 통행하였던 점, ③ 피고인이 이 사건 도로 중앙에 철제 파이프들을 설치하여 철제 파이프와 이 사건 도로 우측 끝 사이의 폭이 2.7m 정도 남게 됨으로써 1 톤 화물차량 만이 겨우 통행할 수 있을 뿐, 5 톤 화물차량의 통행이 불가능하거나 현저히 곤란하게 된 점 등에 비추어 보면, 피고인이 원심 판시와 같이 육로를 불통하게 하여 교통을 방해한 사실을 충분히 인정할 수 있다고
The decision was determined.
B. In light of the records of the above deliberation, we affirm and accept the above fact finding and judgment of the court below, and there is an error of misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles as alleged by the defendant in the judgment below.
Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.
3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.