logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 진주지원 2013.09.11 2013고정182
일반교통방해
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. The summary of the facts charged is as follows: (a) the Defendant is aware of D’s inspection in the Busan Cheong-gun C.

From March 201 to August 2012, the Defendant: (a) parked a vehicle owned by the Defendant on the access road to the temple located at a distance of 2.5 meters in width of the ditches 2.5 meters from March 2011 to August 2012; and (b) obstructed the traffic of ordinary vehicles on the land through which ordinary vehicles pass.

2. The purpose of the crime of interference with general traffic under Article 185 of the former Criminal Act is to punish all acts of causing damage to or infusing land, etc. or significantly obstructing traffic by other means and thus making it impossible or considerably difficult to pass through by means of causing damage to or infusing land, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 95Do1475, Sept. 15, 1995). The term “land” refers to a place of public traffic by the general public, i.e., a place of public character in which many and unspecified persons, or vehicles and horses are able to freely pass through without limiting to a specific person.

(Supreme Court Decision 2009Do1376 Decided February 25, 2010). On the other hand, in criminal proceedings, evidence that a criminal fact exists shall be presented by a prosecutor. Even if the defendant's appeal is unreasonable and the defendant's appeal is false, it cannot be disadvantageous to the defendant. The proof of criminal facts requires a judge to have high probability to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt, and if there is no evidence to form such a conviction, there is no doubt of guilt against the defendant.

Even if there is no choice but to judge the interests of the defendant.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2007Do163 Decided November 30, 2007, etc.). According to the evidence adopted and examined by this court in light of the above legal principles, the Defendant was “Apuled with a permission to occupy and use public waters of approximately 2.5 meters in width and about 30 meters in length, from among 4,116 square meters in the city, Cheongnam-gun, Busan-gun, the 2006 square meters in width, with a permission to occupy and use public waters of about 2.5 meters in width and about 30 meters in length.”

arrow