The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles) is as follows: “D church village” (hereinafter “the passage space of this case”) as stated in the facts charged of this case refers to the part of the land owned by the D church and part of the land owned by the I company, which the defendant is working as the head of the Gu, and the village cannot be deemed as a village. In order to move to a place where E is carrying out construction, it is the length of passing through a part of the land owned by Q and the land owned by I company other than the passage space of this case where the defendant parked the vehicle. At the time of this case, there was a space to the extent that the amount of general car can pass by the vehicle of the defendant at the time of this case, and therefore the act of parking the vehicle in the passage space of this case does not constitute

In addition, in addition, in the event that there is a meeting of the church that belongs to the integrated religious order of the church that belongs to the different religious order of the Gun present at the time of the instant case, the vehicles located in each church obtain the church conference and cut off the vehicles owned by the defendant's vehicle and the D church, making use of the passage space of this case as a temporary parking space, and therefore there is a intention to commit general traffic obstruction.

subsection (b) of this section.

Nevertheless, the court below convicted the charged facts of this case. The court below erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. On February 24, 2017, from around 13:00 to around 15:30 of the same day, the Defendant: (a) was parked in the village adjacent to the boundary of D church located in Chungcheongnam-gun; (b) the Defendant installed fences to prevent the entry of ready-mixed vehicles, etc. used for the construction of multi-family housing in which E is constructed by blocking the part of the village road; (c) removed the fences without permission; and (d) the Defendant forced the removal of the fences and construction; and (e) the Defendant parked in the roads adjacent to the D church to prevent the construction; and (e) three households that used the construction vehicle and the existing road.