Defendant shall be punished by a fine of one million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Punishment of the crime

around 09:45 on November 5, 2015, the Defendant appears to have installed a structure that the Defendant installed as a steel pipe in light of the contents of civil litigation related to C and the previous criminal litigation at the same place as the instant case by piling up stone, etc., and punished for general traffic obstruction, not “E” but “F” but “F” at the former address. Even if the Defendant’s ex officio correction is made, it does not interfere with the Defendant’s right to defense. Thus, the Defendant ex officio correction is made ex officio. The Defendant asserted the ownership of the land equivalent to 20 square meters located on a road located in a width of 3.5 meters, and obstructed the traffic by installing a structure connected with a steel pipe on the said road, as he thought that the passage of many residents other than the village residents D who use it.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Statement of the police statement related to G;

1. Application of the statutes governing the detection photographs;

1. Article 185 of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting an offense, Article 185 of the Criminal Act selective punishment, and the choice of fines;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Determination on the assertion of justifiable act under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The defendant asserts that it constitutes a justifiable act, inasmuch as he received a favorable judgment in a civil lawsuit against Namyang-si and installed a structure as stated in the facts charged in the instant case.

2. Determination

A. To recognize any act as a justifiable act as a justifiable ground for excluding illegality, the following must be met: (a) legitimacy of the motive or purpose of the act; (b) reasonableness of the means or method of the act; (c) balance between the protected legal interests and the infringed legal interests; (iv) urgency; and (e) supplementary requirements that have no means or method other than the act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 9Do4273, Mar. 10, 200). (b) According to the evidence duly adopted after the submission to this court as to whether the act was justifiable; and (d) the defendant raised a lawsuit against South and North Korea-si to render a favorable judgment in the first instance trial.