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

The defendant is a person who operates a D restaurant in the eternic City C.

On November 11, 2015, the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of KRW 700,00 as a crime of violating the Juvenile Protection Act, and the judgment became final and conclusive on August 9, 2016. The above case was that the Defendant sold three weeks to four juveniles, including E, around March 28, 2015.

On August 24, 2016, the Defendant entered the OO high school located in F in Sungsung City on August 13:20, 2016, and made the name of E in front of the third grade school office, and prevented teachers, such as the victim G, etc., who were the principal of the above school in the school room at the time when the Defendant took care of the name of E, etc., and opened the back of the fourth grade school and opened the back of the victim in the third grade four class, and continues to practice the name of the damaged teacher. However, the Defendant, “E, H, I, J, Ha, P, and ninen.

Does they have forged or falsified resident registration certificates;

This Ganana, “Ar.” refers to a large sound, and for about 17 minutes, the victims interfered with administrative affairs and educational affairs by force.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes governing the G production;

1. Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the relevant criminal facts and Article 314 (1) of the Selection of Punishment;

1. The reasons for the sentencing of Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act, which recognize and reflects the mistake of the defendant, the victim G does not want to be punished against the defendant, and the defendant G does not have any other criminal record except for a fine imposed once as stated in the first head of the crime in the judgment of the court, and the defendant's age, sex, criminal conduct, environment, motive for the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., shall be determined as ordered in light of all the sentencing conditions stated in the arguments of the case.

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.