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

On August 22, 2013, from around 17:00 to 19:00, the Defendant obstructed the victim’s main store business by preventing customers from entering the said main store by avoiding disturbance over about two hours, such as “I see this year, she will do so,” and “I see this year, I see it, I see it, I see it, I see it as follows: “I see it, I see it as if I see it, I see it as I see it, I see it as I see it as I see it as I see it as I see it as I see it as I see.”

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Partial statement of witness D;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes entered in the police statement of D;

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

1. It is so decided as per Disposition on the grounds of Article 186(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act or more of the cost of lawsuit;