beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles only have installed a vehicle on his own land, did not interfere with general traffic, and did not have intention to interfere with traffic.
B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (the fine of KRW 700,000) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, the term "land passage" under Article 185 of the Criminal Act is an offense in which the general traffic safety of the general public is protected under the legal interest and protection of the law, and the term "land passage" in this context refers to the wide passage of land used for the traffic of the general public, and the ownership relation of the site, traffic right relation, or heavy and soundness of traffic users, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Do8750, Feb. 22, 2007). As the reasoning of the judgment of the court below properly explained by the court below, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, namely, the land in this case is a place where many unspecified persons use as traffic, and the defendant is sufficient to establish a general traffic obstruction even if it is owned by the defendant, and it is recognized that the defendant had intention to commit such act.
Therefore, the court below's finding the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is just, and it cannot be deemed that the judgment below erred by mistake or misapprehension of legal principles
The defendant's above assertion is without merit.
B. In full view of the following facts: (a) the Defendant did not object to the allegation of unfair sentencing when denying the Defendant’s crime; (b) the background and degree of the instant crime; and (c) the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the instant crime; and (d) all of the sentencing conditions indicated in the instant records and arguments, including the circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court’s sentencing