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

The defendant decided to purchase the E hotel owned by D in Daejeon Jung-gu, Daejeon, and the victim F(46) is a child of the above D, who resides in the above hotel and manages the above hotel.

1. From March 2, 2017 to the same month, the Defendant who obstructed business affairs;

3. From 08:00 to the above hotel, the above hotel claimed the right of the assignee with respect to the above hotel, thereby combining the main entrance knife of the 1st floor of the above hotel with hacks so as to prevent customers from entering the above hotel.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the victim's hotel operation by force.

2. On March 2, 2017, the Defendant reported to the police on the ground that he/she refused to comply with the victim’s demand to leave several times at the above hotel around 19:00 on March 2, 2017, and was subject to the police investigation at the Daejeon Daejeon Police Station, Daejeon, Daejeon, Daejeon, on the same day.

Nevertheless, the defendant was in the same month.

3. Around 01:00, an elevator installed at the above hotel underground parking lot was intruded into a structure under the management of the victim, getting up the elevator installed therein;

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police with regard to F;

1. A written statement;

1. Each investigation report and the application of Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act and Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of interference with business), Article 319(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of intrusion on a structure) and the selection of fines for the crime;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

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

1. The sentence shall be determined as ordered by taking into account the fact that the sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act does not have the same record as the reason for the provisional payment order, that there is a mistake and that there are circumstances to be taken into account in the course of the crime.