If the Defendants did not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

On February 9, 2016, the Defendants: (a) on the ground that there was an employee G and Si expenses from the “F” entertainment drinking point in the “F” entertainment drinking point of the victim E (n, 43 years old); (b) on February 22:10, 2016, the Defendants sent to G for the reason that there was an employee G and Si expenses; (c) whether the Defendant “I am flick, nibly,” and

Dr. The saba of the saba of the saba of the inside;

Defendant B, “I wish to increase n’t,” and Defendant B, Defendant B, who continued to refrain from doing so, expressed h’s intent to “I’t h?h?h?h?h?h?h?h?h?h?h?h?h?h?h?h?h?h?h?h?h?h?h?h?h?h?h??h?h?h?h?h?h??h?h?h?h?h?h?h?h?h?h?h??h?h?h?h?h?h?h?h?h?h?h?h?h?h?h?h?h?h?h?h?h?h?

D. C. C. C. H. H. H. H. H. H. H. H. H. H. H. H. C. H. H. H. H. c. C. C.P.P.

As a result, the Defendants conspired to interfere with the victim's main business by force.

Summary of Evidence

1. Each legal statement by the Defendants (as at the second public trial date);

1. Statement of the police statement related to G;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes, such as investigation reports (for all the Defendants)

1. Relevant legal provisions and Articles 314(1) and 30 of the Criminal Act regarding criminal facts (the partial reduction of fines shall be made in consideration of the fact that the punishment is chosen, the crime is recognized, and the victim E does not want punishment against the Defendants)

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

1. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act concerning the order of provisional payment;