beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
The gist of the grounds for appeal is that the passage indicated in the facts charged of the instant case (hereinafter referred to as the “way”) does not correspond to the passage of the general public for the traffic of the general public, but is merely a passage through which only a specific farmer is permitted to pass. In addition, the Defendant did not interfere with the passage of the instant passage or interfere with the traffic by any other means.
Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which convicted the defendant of the facts charged of this case is erroneous by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, thereby affecting the conclusion
Judgment
Article 185 of the Criminal Code is an offense of which general traffic obstruction is a legal interest in protecting the safety of traffic of the general public. The term "land passage" refers to the land passage widely used for the traffic of the general public. It does not include the ownership relationship of the site, the traffic relationship, the relationship of rights and interests, or the traffic congestion of the traffic manager.
In addition, the owner of a part of the road which was used as a passage of many unspecified persons.
In light of the above legal principles, in full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below and the court below, the passage of this case constitutes “land passage” as provided in Article 185 of the Criminal Act, and as long as the defendant parked his car on the passage of this case at the time of this case and failed to pass the vehicle, it constitutes “land passage” as provided in Article 185 of the Criminal Act. The Defendant’s act of parking his car on the passage of this case at the time of this case, so long as it constitutes a general traffic obstruction.
Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.
On July 21, 2001, the defendant's arche Q with respect to the 411m2, the previous Gao-gun P, Gyeonggi-do P, and the 237m2, the previous Gao-gun P.