The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that a concrete road of 3 meters wide (hereinafter “instant road”) which is established on the land B of Gyeongcheon-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Gyeong-gun, the owner of the instant land is a personal road used by the defendant, and it is nothing more than an implied permission for the defendant to pass the instant road to D who operates pentthy in the vicinity of the road. Thus, the instant road does not fall under the land category as referred to in general traffic obstruction, and the defendant does not intend to prevent the passage of others in order to protect the ownership of the instant road site, which is a personal land, and the defendant does not intend to interfere with the passage of others. However, the court below found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case, which affected the conclusion

2. Determination

A. The crime of interference with general traffic under Article 185 of the Criminal Act is an offense in which the legal interest of the safety of traffic in the general public is protecting the safety of traffic in the general public. The term "land passage" refers to the wide passage of land used for the traffic in the general public. It does not go through the ownership of the site, the relationship of traffic rights, or the large and hostileness of traffic users (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2001Do6903, Apr. 26, 2002).

In other words, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below: ① the road of this case had existed prior to the number of years in front of the non-packaged; on April 2010, Gohap-gun used the construction cost to pack the road of this case with approximately 300 meters in length and approximately 3 meters in width; ② the road of this case was connected with other roads; ② the road of this case was connected with the road of this case, and the village residents’ dry field, etc. around the road of this case, and ③ the road of this case seems to require the traffic of the vehicle, agricultural machinery, and village residents; ③ the road of this case is due to the end of the road of this case, the road of this case would be reasonable for the passage of the gate users at the weekend, etc.; and the defendant to the above pent-gun owner D.