logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 청주지방법원 제천지원 2018.05.24 2018고정13
일반교통방해
Text

The sentence of sentence against the defendant shall be suspended.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On September 3, 2015, the Defendant: (a) placed at around 20,000, approximately 20,000, the D pension 2 complex located in Chungcheongnam-gun C around 17:0 to 3 complex, and placed at least 2,000, a large amount of the roads, thereby hindering the passage of roads used for the traffic of the general public.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Protocol concerning the interrogation of suspects of E;

1. Each police statement made to F and G;

1. Two copies of an investigation report (in addition to the following satellite photographs on the Internet portal site, hereinafter “the Internet portal site”).

1. 8 copies, such as investigation report (to hear statements by suspect A and confirm whether they were the land), output of Internet maps, etc. (the defendant and his defense counsel recognized the fact that three persons were placed above as recorded in the facts constituting a crime, but there was no intention to obstruct traffic;

The argument is asserted.

On the other hand, the crime of interference with general traffic under Article 185 of the Criminal Act is a crime that legally protects the general traffic safety of the general public. The term "land passage" refers to the wide passage of land that is actually common use for the traffic of the general public. It does not prevent ownership relation, traffic relationship, or multiple persons, or snow, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 94Do2112, Nov. 4, 1994; 9Do1651, Jul. 27, 1999). The following circumstances acknowledged by the above evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court, namely, ① the statement of criminal facts (hereinafter referred to as "road of this case") are the following facts acknowledged by the above evidence, namely, the ownership of the road of this case where many and unspecified persons, such as HA users, users, etc., used the road of this case, and ③ the owner of the road of this case, who installed the road of this case, could not limit the entry of the former or unspecified persons.

arrow