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

From July 3, 2016 to July 16:15 to 16:45, the Defendant interfered with traffic by making the above land flow off at a total of six times from July 26, 2016, as indicated in the list of crimes committed in the annexed Table, by allowing the Defendant to stop traffic without paying tolls, on the ground that the above length is one’s own own own own own own own.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement made by the police with regard to D;

1. Each statement of E, F, G, H, and I;

1. A report on investigation (a report on confirmation of forest roads going to the Yeong-gun, Yacheon-si, Yacheon-si, Yacheon-si, Yanam-gun, the

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of evidence photographs (Evidence No. 27);

1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act and Article 185 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting a crime;

1. The aggravated punishment for concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act (the aggravated punishment for concurrent crimes with the punishment stipulated for the crime of interference with traffic by a person on July 16, 2016, the largest punishment for concurrent crimes);

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

1. The defendant and his defense counsel's assertion on the assertion of the defendant and his defense counsel under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the Provisional Payment Order asserts that traffic has not been impeded since they could pass through after collecting tolls, and that the situation is based on a community resident's agreement, and therefore there is no intention to interfere with traffic.

In light of the above legal principles, the crime of interference with general traffic under Article 185 of the Criminal Act is a crime of protecting the safety of the general public’s traffic, and the term “land passage” here refers to the wide passage of land that is actually used for the traffic of the general public, and the ownership relation of the site, the relation of the traffic right and the right of the traffic or the traffic of the traffic requester is not limited (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Do8750, Feb. 22, 2007). According to the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court, the land of this case has been used for the traffic of the general public for a long period of time.