logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2016.11.01 2016노447
재물손괴등
Text

All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant (the second instance) did not obstruct the Defendant’s traffic or business because the instant road is not the land owned by the Defendant nor the land owned by the general public, but can enter through other passages.

Even if it constitutes a crime of interference with general traffic and interference with business, the illegality is dismissed as it prevents a victim from using the road by exercising ownership due to a failure to receive road usage fees from the victim.

B. The prosecutor (the first instance court) removed a fence installed on the boundary of the land owned by the victim and the land owned by the victim, making it unclear the boundary line between both land and the Defendant’s intent to commit a crime of boundary, thereby constituting a crime of boundary intrusion.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The crime of interference with general traffic under Article 185 of the Criminal Act is an offense in which the benefit and protection of the traffic safety of the general public is the crime, and the term “land passage” here refers to the land passage widely used for the traffic of the general public. It does not go through the ownership relationship of the site, the traffic right relationship, or the heavy and hostileness of traffic users (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Do8750, Feb. 22, 2007).

In light of the above legal principles, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, namely, ① the road of this case is used as a road on which the width of the road is about 3.5 meters as well as the passage of the vehicle is possible, ② E,O, L, and K are mainly using the road of this case, but the road of this case is used as a parking lot, store, etc. operated by the general public, ③ the road of this case is used as a parking lot, store, etc. operated by the general public, ③ the road of this case is a road from the public road to the above parking lot, store, etc., but the road of this case seems to be difficult to free access of the vehicle due to extreme narrow width.

arrow