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

On September 21, 2016, at around 16:40, the Defendant, who was dissatisfied with the issue of the burden of resettlement costs due to the redevelopment of Pyeongtaek-si, was the employee of the redevelopment-related company, and the victim C (61) and D (70) who was the head of Tong, were faced with the victims, and threatened the victims, such as “to throw away the time-to-date,” by expressing the victims the excessive (16 cm length of the blade) of dangerous articles in possession, which were in his possession, toward the victims.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the prosecution with regard to D;

1. C’s statement;

1. Application of the statutes on the list of seizure;

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 Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Article 48 (1) 1 of the Criminal Act to be confiscated;

1. The sentencing conditions of the Defendant’s age, occupation, sex, family relationship, and circumstances before and after the crime are determined by comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the Provisional Payment Order and other conditions of the sentencing indicated in the record.

- The crime of this case does not correspond to the nature of the crime, except that the victims want to take the Defendant’s prior action. - The Defendant’s mistake reflects his fault.