A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant illegally buried each of the instant lands B, C, and D and practically operated E (E) at the same time, and the victim F (42) is a site warden of H Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “H”) with the same time with the land of the said land included C.

On the other hand, on October 6, 2016, H leased part of the above D land from the mining perspective of the owner of the above land in order to use it as a temporary bridge and a site for the above road construction.

On November 8, 2016, the Defendant was subject to the administrative vicarious execution with respect to the obstacles to the above C land from the Mineyang-si, and on January 12, 2017, the Gwangju District Court rendered a provisional disposition with respect to the prohibition of interference with road construction and access to the above C and D land.

The Defendant, around 07:00 on April 17, 2017, went through the road construction site at the above C and D on April 17, 2017, went through the road construction site, and parked in the front of a bridge connected to the above land by blocking any longer the use of a rocketing car belonging to E and the construction site at the construction site, and prevented any equipment, number of personnel, etc. belonging H from passing through the road.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the work of the injured party by force.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

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

1. Photographs and current status map;

1. Text of the decision to support the Gwangju District Court;

1. Application of statutes to know that administrative vicarious execution warrant is issued, request for cooperation, detailed action plan for administrative vicarious execution, report on completion of administrative vicarious execution;

1. Relevant Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act provides that the suspended execution is disadvantageous to the defendant that he/she has expressed his/her intent to obstruct construction continuously without respecting the court's decision on provisional disposition. However, the circumstances leading up to this case, the degree of interference with construction of this case, the criminal records of the defendant, and the background leading up to this case.