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

The defendant is a person who has been awarded a subcontract for the construction work of the building C in Ulsan-gu, Ulsan-gu, where the victim B is a building owner.

As the defendant did not receive the above construction cost, he had the mind to exercise the right of retention on the above building.

On December 8, 2015, the Defendant opened the above entrance and entered the said building after blocking electricity in front of the above C building from operating the entrance to which the password should be entered.

As such, the Defendant invaded upon the building managed by the injured party in collaboration with the above name weak boxes.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each police statement made with respect to B or D;

1. On-site photographs, construction photographs (the defendant's entry into a building to exercise the right of retention as a legitimate lien, which is alleged to be a justifiable act, but it cannot be acknowledged that the defendant is a legitimate lien holder, and the above argument cannot be accepted) and the application of statutes.

1. Article 2(2) and Article 2(1)1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (Amended by Act No. 13718, Jan. 6, 2016; Act No. 13718, Jan. 6, 201); Article 319(1) of the Criminal Act; the selection of fines;

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

1. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act concerning the order of provisional payment;