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

On October 13, 2015, at around 20:20, the Defendant: (a) committed a dispute with the victim within 1501 elevator operated by the victim E (the age of 41) in the Plaintiff’s underground parking lot of Yeonsu-gu Incheon apartment, Yeonsu-gu, Incheon, with respect to the vehicle driven by the Defendant, and (b) threatened the victim by taking a detailed attitude that the victim would be able to take on the part of the victim, i.e., “Am, e., e., e., e., e., e., e., f., e., e., e., e., 150.).

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. Investigation report (report on execution of telephone recording, such as details of damage to victims E);

1. An apartment CCTV image photograph;

1. Application of CCTV image Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant Article 283 of the Criminal Act concerning facts constituting an offense, Article 283 (1) of the Criminal Act selection of punishment, and selection of fines;

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 on the claim of the defendant and his defense counsel under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the Provisional Payment Order: although at the time the defendant and his spouse have come to a dispute with the parking of the defendant and his spouse as well as the victim in the parking lot, there was no threat from the elevator inside to the victim as they were in his/her hands, and there was no domestic language.

This argues to the effect that it does not constitute intimidation by merely displaying decentralization, etc.

However, in full view of the following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by this court, the Defendant’s assertion on the part of the Defendant is not acceptable, since the Defendant expressed that the Defendant would inflict harm on the body, etc. of the victim as stated in the facts charged after putting CCTV inside the elevator at the time, and subsequently, have sufficiently recognized the fact of threatening the victim as stated in the facts charged.

A. First of all, the background of the instant case is examined by the Defendant at the apartment parking lot with F.