Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

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

Punishment of the crime

On October 25, 2017, the Defendant newly constructed a stable in a concrete-shaped farm, the width of which is equivalent to 4 meters from the land-ro, the land-ro, located in the former-owned Free Zone B, and obstructed traffic by spreading a width of 4 meters and one meter in depth using an excavating machine on the ground that the dynad prevents the passage of construction vehicles.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. On-site inspection records of this court;

1. Statement to C by the police;

1. Photographs of the case site;

1. A survey and appraisal report prepared by appraiser D;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to an investigation report (field investigation), an investigation report (Attachment to a certified copy of the land register), an investigation report (related to construction transportation and questioning by the competent military authority);

1. Article 185 of the Criminal Act and Article 185 of the same Act concerning criminal facts and the choice of fines;

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

1. Judgment on the Defendant’s assertion under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. Summary of the assertion

A. Since the forest land B (hereinafter “instant land”) in North Korea-U.S.-U.K. where the instant road is located is forest land category E owned by the Defendant, it does not constitute “land access” as prescribed by the general traffic obstruction under Article 185 of the Criminal Act, since it is forest land category E owned by the Defendant.

B. On October 10, 2018, E community residents purchased the instant land and completed the registration of ownership transfer, and decided to reinstate the instant land to its original land category as forest land for village development.

Accordingly, the Defendant, as at the time of the transfer of the instant land, was walking concrete in order to planting trees, and buried with stone, and the Defendant’s above act is merely using and managing land according to the intention of the owner of the land, and thus constitutes a justifiable act that does not violate social rules.

2. Determination

A. Legal doctrine 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 law for the safety of traffic of the general public. Here, the term “land access” refers to the traffic of the general public.