The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of three million won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The place of this case where a defendant drives a mistake of facts is not a private land or a place provided for public passage, but a limited person is not a road. Even if it is a snow road, the defendant did not recognize the place where he drives as a road. The court below erred in the misapprehension of facts that found the defendant guilty.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) A determination on the assertion of mistake of facts is a road under the Road Traffic Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 97Nu20755, Mar. 27, 1998). Even if a specific person or a person with a specific building related thereto can only use it and independently manage it, it constitutes a road under the above Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 92Do828, Jun. 22, 1993). The lower court and the first instance court were duly adopted and investigated by evidence. In other words, considering the following circumstances, ① a person who intends to have access to a vinyl house around the road operated by the Defendant appears to have been able to have been able to freely pass by the unspecified person or a vehicle, ② a specific building related thereto can only be used by a specific person or a person, and ④ a road operated by the Defendant without physical control, such as a restaurant operated by the Defendant.

Therefore, the defendant.