The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (based on factual errors and misapprehension of legal principles) is that the road in this case constitutes pedestrian, and thus, the Defendant’s act of installing a steel network fence cannot be deemed as constituting general traffic obstruction.

2. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, i.e., ① part of the land B in the Net City of this case was used as a road for neighboring residents and by using cars, etc. from at least a few years ago, ② so long as the above road is used as a road for the passage of the general public, it cannot be deemed that the use is limited to the use of the road as a pedestrian, as alleged by the defendant, as long as the road is used as a road for the passage of the general public. ③ However, when the defendant constructed a wire network fence on the land B, the width of the above road was reduced to approximately 3.8 meters, and thus, it was impossible for neighboring residents to walk the above road, and there were appeals against traffic inconvenience, it constitutes a general traffic obstruction that significantly makes it difficult for the defendant to walk the road of this case.

Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the conclusion is groundless.