The defendant is innocent. The summary of this judgment shall be notified publicly.

1. On June 8, 2016, the summary of the facts charged in the instant case, the Defendant interfered with traffic by piling up bricks and installing a cement fence (148cm, 85cm in height, 14cm in thickness) in order to prevent the passage of D on the alleyway with a size of 85cm in width (E) owned by the Defendant, which is connected to D’s residence located in Sinsi-si (hereinafter “the instant alley”) and D from running along the said alley, and thereby making it difficult for the Defendant to pass by the general public.

2. Determination

A. The purpose of interference with general traffic under Article 185 of the Criminal Act is to punish all acts that cause damage to or influence of land, etc., or interfere with traffic by other means, and thus make it impossible or considerably difficult (see Supreme Court Decision 95Do1475, Sept. 15, 1995, etc.). The term “land access” refers to a place of public traffic by general public, i.e., a place of public nature where many and unspecified people or horses are allowed to freely pass through, without limited to a specific person (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Do1376, Feb. 25, 2010).

The title of this case is the same as the investigation record of the attached Form No. 99, which is abutting on a large path. It is a dead-end string of approximately 1.45 meters in width, beginning between the land in the Seocho-si (hereinafter referred to as the “written but only once) and the G land, and ending between the land in the Gu and C where D is residing.

During the period from large paths to C, the entrance (F ground) of the main entrance (J ground) of the Non-Party’s operation and the entrance (J ground) operated by H are located in the order of priority, and there is a door installed by I in the middle of alley, and there is a correction device installed by J and E in the middle of alley, and there is a bitra warehouse between J and E, the end of alley.