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

The defendant is the occupant of Kimpo-si B apartment and Cdong D, and the victim F is the occupant of the apartment under the same apartment Cdong E, and the defendant and the victim have experienced conflicts for two years due to the inter-floor noise problem of apartment.

On May 9, 2019, at around 19:48, the Defendant attached to the elevator wall of the above apartment C, 19:48, a letter of warning "A4" to the elevator wall of the above apartment C, and "the security room and the situation room" had a consistent response thoroughly, noise, noise, repeated noise, and noise that the principal directly generates, continuously lowering the floor, and sanctions were imposed, but all disregarding that the Defendant was imprisoned at all, but did not have any contact with the guard room, it appears that the child was right behavior, whether there was an emergency attitude between him/her, not just a normal behavior, but rather a normal behavior, that caused damage to the surrounding area, and that he/she damaged the reputation of the victim by openly posting the contents such as "the minimum time of keeping the order".

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. The witness F’s legal statement;

1. Written complaint and certificate of contents of the F;

1. Notices of warning;

1. Corrections

(B) The draft of a written apology;

1. Each investigation report (report on the substance of noise on the day of the instant case through the Chief of Security Office G telephone conversations, the Chief of Security Office H, and the Chief of Security Office H) / The Defendant asserts that the Defendant did not indicate false facts, as the Defendant actually produced noise, such as: (a) the victim was engaged in the work to build a wheeler for children’s children’s use in subparagraph (e); and (b) the victim was taking care of opening a wheeler; and (c) the details of receipt of noise complaint submitted by the Defendant (as evidence records Nos. 19 and below) from August 2017 to the date of the instant crime, the Defendant is presumed to have suffered noise in subparagraph E; and (d) the management office and guard room.