Defendants shall be punished by a fine of KRW 300,000.

If the Defendants did not pay each of the above fines, 100.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendants are co-owners who purchased four parcels, including D, Gyeong-gun, Gyeong-gun, Gyeong-gun, and Gyeong-gun.

On April 1, 2016, at around 16:00, the Defendants were unable to use 5gs and 1gs from each side of the ditches adjacent to the Gyeongbuk-gun, Gyeongbuk-gun, through a general vehicle that proceeds from each of the 5gs and 1gs around the core construction site.

As a result, the Defendants conspired to obstruct the traffic on land.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ partial statement

1. Legal statement of witness E;

1. The police statement concerning F;

1. The purpose of the investigation report (the photograph of the accused and the defense counsel, among the ditches of this case, the part of the ditches of this case belongs to the land owned by the defendants, and the defendants do not constitute a general traffic obstruction. However, the purpose of the general traffic obstruction under Article 185 of the Criminal Act is to punish all the acts of causing damage to or infusing land, etc. or significantly obstructing traffic by causing damage to or infusing land, etc. or other means, and the "land passage" is to widely refer to the land passage of the general public, and thus, the ownership of the land, traffic rights, or traffic congestion, etc. are not applied (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Do717, Dec. 28, 2007). Thus, the defendants' assertion that the general traffic obstruction under Article 185 of the Criminal Act is not applicable to the crime under which the general traffic obstruction is against the legal interest of the general public.

1. Relevant Articles 330 and 30 of the Criminal Act and the Defendants who choose the punishment for the crime:

1. Defendants of detention in a workhouse: Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act

1. Defendants of the provisional payment order: Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act