The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. According to the summary of the grounds for appeal, such as field photographs and witness G testimony, etc., it can be confirmed that the victim's duty to extract aggregate was obstructed by the truck and track of the Defendants at the time of the instant case, and further, the Defendants are fully aware of such fact. Thus, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the Defendants is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts.

2. The lower court’s judgment: ① in a case where the Defendants attempted to interfere with the passage of dump trucks by side passage, the Defendants parked biters and wing trucks (on the road, one ton truck; hereinafter the same shall apply) on the passage route; ② They parked on the edge of the passage route; ② the Defendants parked on the side of the passage route; ② the Defendants secured a large width space by parking the dump truck. G driving a dump truck at the time of the passage route, even though there are only one dump truck, as the opposite side of the parking side of the Defendants parked and only one dump truck, it is impossible to pass the dump truck at the time of the passage of the Defendants, but there is no sufficient evidence to conclude that the Defendants had been aware of such circumstances, and even if there were two dump trucks and two dump trucks, it is possible for the Defendants to actively stop the passage of the dump truck until the passage of the dump.