If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won shall be one day.

The defendant is the head of the management office of Songpa-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government apartment, and the victim D (59) is a technical director of the representative meeting of apartment occupants.

On July 13, 2017, at around 08:40, the Defendant demanded the victim to have a conflict of opinion in the process of handling the above apartment at the front parking lot of the above apartment 1, but, on the ground that the victim does not avoid and reach it, the Defendant obstructed the victim's car at work, opened the driver's seat and opened the driver's seat on the vehicle, sound the driver's seat on the vehicle, and boomed the victim's left hand and boomed the victim with the driver's seat.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of the witness D;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of police statement protocol to E;

1. Relevant Article 260 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense, Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act selection of punishment, and selection of fines;

1. Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act concerning the confinement of a workhouse (the defendant and his defense counsel asserts that the defendant's act constitutes a justifiable act that does not contravene social norms.

“Act which does not contravene social norms” as defined in Article 20 of the Criminal Act refers to an act which is acceptable in light of the overall spirit of legal order or the social ethics or social norms surrounding the act. Thus, a certain act must meet the requirements such as legitimacy of the motive or purpose, reasonableness of the means or method of the act, balance of the legal interests of protected interests and interests, urgency, and supplement that there is no other means or method other than that of the act.

The balance of the legal interests of the defendant at the time of committing the crime, urgency, supplement, etc.

It is difficult to recognize such assertion with no merit.

For the reason of sentencing, the defendant has no record of criminal punishment for the same crime, and the damage has not been recovered, but has been minor.

The sentencing conditions shown in the instant trial, such as the fact that they appear, are considered.