The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

All the costs of the original judgment and the trial shall be borne by the defendant.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal does not constitute “land” of the general traffic obstruction since the Defendant’s place where trees are planted by digging out the ground with the excavating machine (hereinafter “instant land”) cannot be seen as a village resident or a place where the general public flows.

2. The crime of interference with general traffic under Article 185 of the Criminal Act is an offense in which the legal interest of the general traffic safety of the general public is protected. Here, “land” refers to a place of public passage by and from the general public, i.e., a place of public character where an unspecified number of people, vehicles, and horses are allowed to freely pass through without limited to a specific person (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Do14589, Jan. 27, 201). In light of the land of this case and the shape of the surrounding land recognized by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, the land of this case is a place where many unspecified people, including village residents, can freely pass through, and constitutes a

[Judgment of recommending reconciliation in the case of demanding confirmation, etc. of the right to passage over surrounding land, which is brought against the Defendant by the Gwangju District Court (U.S. District Court 2012Na30424). However, such a decision of recommending reconciliation does not interfere with recognizing that the land of this case falls under a road for the traffic of the public). Accordingly, the Defendant’s above assertion on a different premise is rejected.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is without merit and thus dismissed pursuant to Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices, on the ground that the defendant's appeal is with merit, and the costs of the trial by the court below and the party shall be borne by the defendant pursuant to Articles 191 (1), 190 (1) and

However, Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act (amended by Act No. 12575, May 14, 2014) apply to the statutes of the court below.