All appeals by the Defendants and the Prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The trees cut by Defendant A1) 2014 high group of 875 (misunderstanding of legal principles and mistake of facts) related to interference with the duties of Defendant A1) are the possession of the Defendant, and thus, G’s failure to cut it does not constitute a legitimate exercise of right to interfere with the duties.

2) The Defendant merely notified G et al. of the right to the effect that the current status of the instant case (referring to the current status of concrete packaging in around 2003, centering on the part of the Gangwon Hongcheon-gun H road; hereinafter the same shall apply) that he/she passed to G et al. for the construction, includes the land in the J of the Hongcheon-gun Hongcheon-gun, the Defendant’s attachment, which is the Defendant’s attachment, and because there are trees owned by the Defendant in the vicinity of the instant situation, the Defendant did not exercise power.

B. Defendant B (misunderstanding of legal principles and mistake of facts) regarding general traffic obstruction in the present situation of this case, there is only K’s house, which is the Defendant’s punishment, and only K’s family members passed the present situation of this case between several years. As the present situation of this case cannot be seen as a place where many unspecified people freely pass, it does not constitute “land” which is the object of general traffic obstruction.

In addition, since the width of the present road of this case reaches 2 meters even after the defendant installed a steel pent, it is possible to pass a general car, etc.

2) The assertion regarding the crime of property damage (misunderstanding of facts) was made by the Defendant with soil piling up on concrete, but did not destroy concrete.

(c)

The prosecutor's (unfair sentencing) sentence of the court below (the defendant A's imprisonment for six months, the suspension of execution for two years, and the defendant B's fine for three million won) is too uncomfortable and unfair.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court regarding Defendant A’s assertion on interference with the duties of 2014 Highest 875, Defendant A, the trees of which G attempted to cut are the only Hongcheon-gun of Hongcheon-gun, or they.