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

[Attachment] The Defendant and the Victim C were the chief of the Trade Union (Uniformd Labor Union) of E Co., Ltd. located in Bupyeong-gu Incheon, Bupyeong-gu, Incheon, and the Defendant, at the office used by the victim’s union, laid off the locked office door door with locks without the victim’s permission, and took office supplies used by the Defendant’s union. The above door door was corrected as a new lock, and the above door was corrected by the Incheon District Court on May 13, 2016. The judgment was finalized on May 21, 2016.

【Criminal Facts】

Although the Defendant received a final and conclusive judgment of conviction due to the crime of intrusion on a structure, the Defendant continued to occupy the office of the victim E’s trade union from May 22, 2016 to June 30, 2016, which became final and conclusive, without permission, and thereby interfered with the victim’s trade union operation by force.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. C’s legal statement;

1. The defendant and his defense counsel asserted that the crime of interference with business is not established because the defendant obtained the right to use the office as stated in the judgment of the defendant E.

In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by this court, the defendant co-ownership of the office that he received from E, taking into account the following circumstances: (a) although he allowed the use of the office to a trade union to which he belongs, he did not belong but the trade union to which the victim belongs; (b) the defendant entered the office with the victim but continued to use the office; and (c) the defendant used most of the above office and did not use the office; and (d) the defendant did not use the office, and (e) the defendant did not use the office.