The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles (the fact of interference with the driving of electric vehicles), the Defendant, who did not receive any wage, was unable to commit suicide by forceing the remaining drunk and resulting in an accident on the electric train tracks. This is merely merely a temporary interference with the driving of electric trains, and it does not constitute an act of making the passage of electric trains impossible or considerably difficult, and thus, it does not constitute a interference with the driving of electric vehicles against the Defendant.

The punishment sentenced by the court below on the defendant (two months of imprisonment and a fine of five hundred thousand won) is too unreasonable.

Judgment

The purpose of Article 186 of the Criminal Act is to punish all acts which make it impossible or considerably difficult to pass through by interfering with traffic of the former, as a crime which is the benefit and protection of the law of traffic safety of the latter.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2008Do10560 Decided January 30, 200, etc.). According to the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below, the defendant heard information broadcasting that electric trains are entering the tracks 2, and entered the tracks in the direction of the electric train that entered the tracks. The above electric trains discovered it and entered the first stop, and the defendant stopped at the speed of about 10 meters from the center of the tracks, and stopped at the speed of about 10 meters from the defendant's moving-in. According to the above facts, the defendant was considerably difficult to pass through the electric trains or was considerably difficult to pass through the traffic safety under Article 86 of the Criminal Act.