Where the defendant fails to pay the above fine, one hundred thousand won shall be one day.

On May 13, 2015, from around 14:50 to 16:30 on the same day, the Defendant obstructed the victim’s hospital’s business operation by force by demanding the victim to conduct unnecessary inspection of the Defendant’s peties within the “Ea hospital operated by the victim D(55 years of age, south)”. The Defendant expressed a large amount of the victim’s desire to “whether the victim is a veterinarian who is frightd with money or frighted stones, frighting on the Internet, and frighting to fright the said apartment, and allowing the said apartment to enter the hospital, thereby obstructing the victim’s hospital’s business operation by force.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of the police statement law to D;

1. Relevant Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of a fine, and the choice of a fine;

1. Articles 70 (1) 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;