Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 700,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant, on April 11, 2020 to April 16, 2020, on the ground that the traffic of an unspecified number of vehicles could freely pass through by and from the entrance of the access road to the access road located in Pyeongtaek-si B, where approximately 6 households live together on April 16, 2020 to around 14:00, by having other people have access to the access road located in Pyeongtaek-si B, and a part of their own residence is ruptured, the Defendant interfered with the traffic of a public place with a public nature where many unspecified vehicles can freely pass through by using a vehicle C belonging to the Defendant.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

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

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a report on internal investigation (not more than four pages of investigation records), report on internal investigation (in addition to field photographs), investigation report (on-site inspection and on-site investigation of witnesses);

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

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

1. Determination on the assertion by the defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The main point of the argument is the part where the defendant parked a vehicle among the land of Pyeongtaek-si J (hereinafter “instant land”) is a personal space where the defendant, the owner of the land, or the defendant’s punishment permitted by the defendant, is used as a house for the purpose of a house, and the defendant has implied access to another person for the convenience of the neighbor’s passage. The instant land does not constitute the land provided for the passage of many unspecified persons.

2. The phrase “land” refers to a crime of interference with general traffic under Article 185 of the Criminal Act as a legal interest in protecting the traffic safety of the general public and refers to the wide passage of land commonly used for the traffic of the general public. The ownership relation of the site, the relation of the traffic right and the right of the passage or the passage of the traffic, etc. are not prohibited (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2001Do6903, Apr. 26, 2002). According to the evidence revealed earlier, the aforementioned provision of evidence is examined.