The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Error of facts and misapprehension of legal principles do not constitute a place of public character in which many and unspecified persons or vehicles and horses can freely pass, and they do not have a substantial difficulty in traffic due to Defendant’s act, and even though Defendant did not have an intention to interfere with general traffic, the lower court convicted the Defendant of the facts charged in this case. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine and misapprehending the legal doctrine

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (fine 2,00,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) Determination of the lower court on the assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles as to the assertion of the adopted evidence, the lower court determined that the above alley road constitutes a public place where an unspecified number of people can freely pass through, and the passage of the above alley road was significantly difficult due to the above boundary marking material. 2) The lower court determined that the above alley road was the following circumstances, which were duly adopted and examined by the lower court, comprehensively taking account of the evidence established by the lower court, and the following circumstances, namely, that the above alley road was used as a passage of many unspecified people, including residents of neighboring housing, and ② the width of the part available for passage from the above alley is reduced to at least 44cm due to the boundary marking material installed by the Defendant, and that the above alley road constitutes the land through the general traffic obstruction, and that the above alley road was well aware of the fact-finding and its public nature at the time of the crime of this case.