If the defendant fails to pay the above fine, 50,000 won shall be one day.

『2013고단257』 피고인은 2013. 1. 3. 20:00경 수원시 팔달구 B 지하 1층 소재 피해자 C이 운영하는 'D식당'내에서 다른 테이블에 있던 손님에게 시비를 걸고, 이를 말리는 피해자에게 "씨발년아, 너 뭘 믿고 장사하냐 , 개같은 년, 죽여버리겠다"며 욕설을 하고, 식당 내에 있는 의자와 휴대용 가스렌지, 술병 등을 바닥에 던져 깨는 등 같은 날 21:05경까지 약 1시간 동안 피해자의 식당 영업 업무를 방해하였다.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of the police protocol law to C

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The reasons for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order include the fact that the defendant was punished by violence and committed the instant crime of obstruction of business without being aware of the fact that he/she was currently under probation, and that he/she agreed with the victim and reflected with the victim, etc., all favorable circumstances favorable to the defendant were determined like the order.

Public prosecution rejection portion "2013 Highest 520"

1. On February 4, 2013, at around 21:20, the Defendant: (a) expressed an agreement in the case of assaulting the Victim F (L, 57 years of age) who is a restaurant proprietor on January 13, 2013; and (b) made a conversation on the part of the victim that the victim would not have reached an agreement without receiving the agreement; (c) committed an assault on the part of the above restaurant, i.e., “S. young children, I need not be subject to imprisonment, and there is no need to reach an agreement”; and (d) assaulted the victim at one time in the part of the victim’s inner part of the drinking-gu, satch.

2. The above facts charged are crimes falling under Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act and cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s explicit intent pursuant to Article 260(3) of the Criminal Act. The victim is prosecuted of the instant case.