Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

On December 25, 2016, from around 12:00 to January 17, 2017, the Defendant obstructed traffic by installing steel pents with the roads provided for the traffic of the general public in the Gun of the southdo between South and North Gun.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Statement made by the police against C;

1. Reporting on the occurrence of a traffic accident;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to an investigation report and an investigation report (in addition to field photographs, attaching air carriers on the following map):

1. Article 185 of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting an offense, Article 185 of the Criminal Act selective punishment, and the choice of fines;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Determination on the Defendant’s assertion under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The assertion that the Defendant installed a steel fence on the land B (hereinafter “instant land”) of the Gun (hereinafter “the instant land”), as indicated in the facts of the crime in the judgment of the court below. However, this is merely an act of preserving and managing the said land on behalf of the Defendant, who is the owner of the instant land, and does not interfere with the general public’s traffic.

2. The "landway" of this case is a crime of interference with general traffic under Article 185 of the Criminal Act, which is a legal interest in protecting the traffic safety of the general public, refers to the wide passage of land that is actually common to the traffic of the general public, and does not see the ownership relation, traffic relation, or heavy and redness of the passage, etc. (see Supreme Court Decision 9Do1651 delivered on July 27, 199, etc.). However, according to the legitimate examination of evidence by this court, the road above the land of this case was used as the passage of the residents of the village, including C, such as the passenger car, freight car, light rail, track, etc. before the defendant acquires ownership, and the defendant was well aware that it was the same. ② The road of this case was a cement package by residents of the village before about 10 years prior to the occurrence of this case, and ③ the road of this case was a cement package by filing a civil petition with the competent government office.