If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

From March 1, 2013, the Defendant is currently serving as the pastor of the overcheon C church, and the victim D is the E representative and the chairperson of the countermeasures group, the victim G is the chairperson of the measures group before the H church and the I total (integrated) of the H church, the victim J is the head of the I group counseling group, the victim K is the chairperson of the L church gathering and the M Association.

The Defendant, from December 7, 2014 to December 21, 2014, takes a sexual seminars from “C church” located in N from “C church” to 20 to 30 pastors, and, in order to show to many and unspecified members, takes a video recording of the above sexual seminars, I talk about the substance of Ear and the name of the person, if any.

D, G, and J are bound to take part in its entirety.

The gushes so far indicate how much people have been able to see how much people do so.

“,” “J, K, G Such gue, D gue, where the title of this gue is recorded.”

Myeonscambing

In addition, there is a need for entry.

Along, I am special, I am special.

The victims were sexually insultingd by expressing to the effect that they were drinking through several times, such as the term “profesing and drinking,” etc.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of the witness D;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the suspect interrogation protocol to some of the accused;

1. Article 311 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Competition;

1. Selection of an alternative fine for punishment;

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

1. The defendant and his defense counsel's assertion against the defendant and his defense counsel under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the Provisional Payment Order. Since the victim D et al. slandered the defendant as the second part of the defendant's religious freedom, the defendant made a statement as stated in its reasoning in the course of engaging in religious activities, such as interpretation of the sexual scambling that reflects the victim D et al., it is unlawful as a legitimate business act or legitimate defense act.