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

On September 21, 2016, at around 22:50, the Defendant: (a) driven a 31 North Korea-U.S.-U. Don-dong Highway 31 (U.S.) on the road in Suwon-gu, Suwon-si, Suwon-si, Suwon-si, and CK7 (39) on the road in which the Defendant was driving, and (b) threatened the victim by making a sudden operation two times in front of the victim’s proceeding and intentionally reducing speed, on the ground that the victim changed the vehicle in front of the victim’s vehicle in the E-U. D (39 (S.) drive, while changing the vehicle in the direction of the vehicle in the direction of the victim, the Defendant was driving the vehicle in front of the kn.e., the kn., the victim continued to drive the vehicle in front of the kn., and followed by two times.

Accordingly, the defendant carried a motor vehicle, which is a dangerous object, and threatened the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of the witness D;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. The photographic image of the damaged vehicle (the defendant and his defense counsel) (the defendant and his defense counsel immediately operated the first step to drive his cell phone in order to get off, and the second step to drive on the expressway, which was caused by a malfunction in the control device of hand-on, and there was no intention of special intimidation; and

However, in light of the fact that the victim's act of raising the meaning of expressing the sudden change of the vehicle of the defendant, immediately after the victim committed the act of using it as a sudden change of the vehicle, there was the first sudden operation, there was a considerable distance from this, and there was a change in the lanes and the second rapid operation in the vehicle of the victim, and it cannot be viewed that it cannot be viewed that it would be the same as that of friendship, there was an intention to threaten the victim with his own vehicle at least at the time of the instant case.

Since the above argument is sufficiently recognized, it is without merit (see Supreme Court Decision 90Do2102 delivered on May 10, 1991, etc.). Application of the law

1. Relevant Article 284 of the Criminal Act, Articles 283(1) and 283 of the Criminal Act, the choice of fines concerning the crime, and the selection of fines;

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