A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant, the representative director of the corporation D, a corporation, holding shares of 5,125 square meters in the area of 9,124 square meters in Busan Geum-gu, Busan, was the representative director. On February 19, 2016, the Defendant interfered with passage through the land by installing a wire network at approximately 120 meters in the entrance of the above access road and its surrounding area, on the ground that the access road leading to the Busan, which was used by residents of the village for at least 10 years in the above forest and field, is included in the above forest and the access road leading to the village, and that the village residents pass through without paying any toll.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Statement made to I by the police;

1. The defendant asserts to the effect that the act of blocking the access road does not constitute a crime of interference with general traffic because the access road in the judgment of the court below is not a “land” provided to the large number of unspecified people, or the access road is opened as a substitute road for passage, and thus, it does not constitute a crime of interference with general traffic.

However, in full view of the evidence in the judgment, the above access road can be recognized as having been used by many unspecified persons including villagers for at least ten years, and ② On the other hand, even if a substitute road was opened, it constitutes a crime of interference with general traffic, as long as it was obstructed without support due to the lack of utility of the old road, and thus, the defendant’s argument is not accepted in entirety).

1. Article 185 of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting the crime;

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act ( considered favorable circumstances among the reasons for sentencing as follows) is that the Defendant continues to interfere with traffic in the same place even though he/she had the record of being sentenced to a fine due to a general traffic obstruction, is disadvantageous circumstances, or that he/she continues to interfere with traffic in the same place.