The defendant shall be innocent.

1. On December 1, 2013, the Defendant, as C staff, installed a steel fence on the road to prevent the passage of the general public by blocking the passage of traffic by the general public on the ground that a traffic accident occurred frequently on the roads in Pyeongtaek-si D (hereinafter referred to as the “road”).

2. As to whether the road of this case constitutes a passage through the general public, the crime of interference with general traffic under Article 185 of the Criminal Act is the crime of protecting the safety of traffic in the general public. The term "land passage" refers to a place of public passage by the general public, namely, a place of public nature where many and unspecified persons or vehicles and horses are allowed to freely pass through without limiting to a specific person (see Supreme Court Decision 99Do401, Apr. 27, 199), witness E's testimony, police protocol statement, complaint statement, and each investigation report, even though the road of this case was used as a passage by village by village residents, the road of this case is currently used as a horse in the gas charging station by the defendant's work, and the owner and the defendant, etc. of the road of this case, etc. of this case, etc., are installed with a iron fence as stated in the facts charged in order to prevent the danger of traffic accidents, and it cannot be acknowledged as a place of free passage by many and unspecified persons without any evidence or public nature.

Thus, the facts charged in this case constitute a case where there is no proof of facts constituting the crime, and thus, the defendant is acquitted pursuant to the latter part of Article 325