The Defendants did not pay each of the above fines.

Defendant

A shall be the chairperson of the E Apartment-si, the auditor of the above representative meeting, the defendant B, and the defendant C shall be the chairperson of the election management committee of the above representative meeting.

The Defendants demanded the replacement of the director of the management office of the supplementary housing management office, which is the management company, on the ground that the victim F, the managing director of the above apartment complex, is not well in compliance with the direction of the resident representative meeting, but the Defendants were willing to accept the request and resolve the dismissal of the director of the management office with respect to the victim F and to interfere with the victim's work and the management office'

According to the above public invitation, the Defendants: (a) purchased the apartment building located in Asan City, G on April 29, 2017; (b) purchased the locks; (c) Defendant B took the locked in hand; and (d) Defendant A prevented the victim from doing duties by installing locks at the entrance of the head of the management office, and allowing the victim to enter the head of the management office, thereby obstructing the management office of the victim by force.

Summary of Evidence

1. The Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. The protocol concerning the interrogation of each police suspect against the Defendants

1. Statement made by the police with regard to F;

1. A report on investigation (report accompanied by relevant data);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to criminal investigation reports (Acrypted houses and verification);

1. Relevant legal provisions and the Defendants’ choice of punishment regarding criminal facts: Articles 314(1) and 314 of the Criminal Act; and the choice of fines

1. Defendants to be detained in the workhouse: Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendants of the provisional payment order: Determination on the assertion by the Defendant and the defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The Defendants asserted that their actions were not for personal interests, but for the interests of the whole apartment occupants, and that they constitute justifiable acts that do not go against the social rules and thus are not illegal.

2. Determination.