beta
Text
The defendant is innocent. The summary of this judgment shall be notified publicly.
Reasons
1. Summary of the facts charged
A. At around 12:00 on May 1, 2014, the Defendant obstructed the traffic of the above roads used by an unspecified number of people by way of parking Trackers and ice freight cars at the entrance of the road, on the ground that D et al. refuses to pay road usage fees, on the ground that D et al. refuses to pay road usage fees.
B. At around 10:00 on May 10, 2014, the Defendant obstructed the traffic of the above roads used by many unspecified persons by bringing test rubbers at the entrance of the above C Road to the middle of the road by placing them on the road.
2. The term “land-based” refers to a crime of interference with general traffic under Article 185 of the Criminal Act, the legal interest of which is the protection of the traffic safety of the general public. The term “traffic” refers to a place of public traffic safety, i.e., a place of public nature in which many and unspecified persons or motor vehicles and horses are able to freely pass
(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 9Do401, Apr. 27, 199). According to the evidence duly adopted and examined in this court, the above roads were established by F, which owned Pyeongtaek-gun E, etc., to build and pass through a warehouse on the ground of the above land, and F, which was not completed due to the default of payment in the construction of a new warehouse, was eventually unable to carry out construction as an issue of a lien, etc. upon the light of D’s light or light, it is difficult to view the land as being used for the passage of many and unspecified persons, and it is difficult to view that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is proven without any reasonable doubt.
3. In conclusion, since the facts charged in this case constitute a case where there is no proof of crime, a judgment of innocence is rendered pursuant to the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and a summary of the judgment against the defendant pursuant to Article 58