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

1. On April 22, 2013, the Defendant interfered with general traffic by installing a steel door (1.7m in width and 1.8m in height) at the end of the D bridge (25m in length, 3.2m in width) located in Bon-si, Bon-si, Sin-si, and allowing the Defendant to fire the above bridge used for the traffic of the general public.

2. Around May 21, 2013, the Defendant interfered with the Defendant’s business operation, by force, obstructed the Defendant’s business of developing a ginseng field by way of force, by failing to open and correct the above steel door on the ground that the Defendant damaged the drainage pipe owned by the Defendant in the process of making the orchard leased by the Defendant from the Defendant into a ginseng field.

Summary of Evidence

【Court No. 1】

1. Statement to the effect that steel door has been installed in the first trial record;

1. Statement made by witnesses E in the second protocol of the trial;

1. Statement made by a witness F in the third protocol of the trial;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. On-site photographs (the second fact on the market);

1. Statement made by the accused that no steel door has been opened around May 21, 2013 in the first trial record;

1. Statement made by witnesses E in the second protocol of the trial;

1. Part of the statement E in the second police interrogation protocol against the accused;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of a farmland lease contract;

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning facts constituting an offense and general traffic obstruction in the choice of punishment: Violation of duties under Article 185 (Selection of Fine) of the Criminal Act: Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act (Selection of Fine);

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act. Article 50 (Aggravation of Concurrent Crimes concerning Obstruction of General Transport Obstruction, which is the most serious offense);

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

1. There is a danger of collapse of the bridge as stated in Paragraph 1 of Article 334 of the Criminal Procedure Act (hereinafter “instant bridge”) on the part of the defendant and his/her defense counsel’s argument that determination on the claim of the defendant and his/her defense counsel is against general traffic obstruction, and a steel door is installed even after the steel door is installed.