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

【Criminal Records of Crimes】 On November 2, 2016, the Defendant was issued a summary order of two million won by the Ulsan District Court as a crime of injury, and on April 25, 2017, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of six months by imprisonment with prison labor for the same crime in the same court and is currently under the suspended sentence of two years.

【Criminal facts】 On May 24, 2017, the Defendant was a woman-friendly woman living in Ulsan-gun, Ulsan-gun, *** such****

C In order to meet B, it was difficult to avoid disturbance for about 1 hour for about 1 hours, such as intrusion upon the 10th apartment floor through the entrance of the above apartment, opening the entrance door to the victim D (Woo, 48 years old) who was in the house of a masted person, and opening the entrance door to the victim D (Woo, 48 years old) who was in the house of the same person.

Accordingly, the defendant invadedd the above apartment living in the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Application of laws and regulations on police statements made to C and D;

1. Article 319 (1) of the Criminal Act and Article 319 of the same Act concerning the crime, the selection of fines;

1. The reason for sentencing under Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act with the custody of the workhouses is that the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence due to the crime of injury committed in the judgment of the Defendant, and that the Defendant committed the instant crime on the only one month, and that the Defendant had already committed the instant crime four times of violence. In light of the overall aspects and contents of the instant crime, the said crime is deemed to have the nature of so-called “ad hoc violence,” and it appears to be disadvantageous to the Defendant that there is no possibility of re-offending

However, in this case, the defendant was sentenced to a fine only once because it seems that there was an agreement with the victim in this case, and that there was a new teaching relationship, and only the case in this case is judged to be somewhat harsh to sentence the defendant.