Article 185 of the Criminal Code 'the meaning of 'land'

The term “land access” as provided in Article 185 of the Criminal Act means a place which is officially used for the traffic of the general public and which has the public character in which many and unspecified persons or vehicles and horses may freely pass.

Article 185 of the Criminal Act

Supreme Court Decision 83Do2617 Decided September 11, 1984

Defendant

Defendant

Jeonju District Court Decision 87No200 delivered on January 27, 1988

The judgment below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Jeonju District Court Panel Division.

As to the Grounds of Appeal:

According to the judgment of the court below, the court below rejected the defendant's appeal that the land of this case owned by the defendant corresponds to the land stipulated in Article 185 of the Criminal Act, which is actually used by the neighboring residents as the road, and that the defendant was unable to pass through by installing a steel network and fence at the time of its explanation, and maintained the judgment of the court of first instance.

However, "Land" in Article 185 of the Criminal Act refers to a place of public traffic in the general public and a place of public character where many and unspecified persons or vehicles and horses are allowed to freely pass through without any specific person (see Supreme Court Decision 83Do2617, Sep. 11, 1984). In light of the records, the land lot in this case was farmland where crops were cultivated, but the urban planning was established by the cadastral public notice of July 12, 197, and the number of residents who are trying to pass through a large number of roads near the land in this case is increasing, and the defendant, the owner, installed a steel tower, etc. over several occasions to prevent them and grow crops, and every time, the residents tried to use them as farmland cultivated before the construction of the road on the land in this case, and it is difficult to view that there was an error of law by misapprehending legal principles as to the passage of the residents in this case without any free passage through the land in this case.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed and the case is remanded to the court below for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Lee Byung-hee (Presiding Justice)