A Imprisonment with prison labor for one year, for ten months, and for six months, for Defendant C, respectively.

except that this shall not apply.

Defendant

A is a director of H (ju) who performs part of the G project, a main apartment complex and officetel construction project implemented by Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government F. The defendant B is the head of the association I branch of the disabled association of the incorporated association, and the defendant C is the head of the above I branch.

Before August 2002, the said G construction site performed part of the H (State) construction, but from August 2002, from around the victim (State)J, the said G construction site was executed by the victim (State)J. On October 2004, the injured party discontinued the construction with the failure to pay the construction cost equivalent to KRW 30.6 billion, and thereafter exercised the lien by occupying the said G construction site from that time.

Defendant

A requested that Defendant B, the head of the association I branch of the disabled association of the disabled persons be mobilized to enter the project site of the G project and to leave the site of the construction by cutting off the victim’s possession or exercising tangible power. Defendant B received KRW 10 million and accepted it, and decided to recruit its members on the condition that Defendant C, the general manager of the branch, shall offer 200,000 won per day to each other. Defendant C passed a resolution in order to recruit its branch members by accepting it.

1. Defendant B, and Defendant C, according to the above public offering, have 12 persons with disabilities who provided money to Defendant B on October 5, 2016, including K, L, M, N,O, P, Q, Q, R, and S (Suspension of Prosecution on the same day) who were disabled persons of the I who provided money to Defendant B and mobilized on October 5, 2016, and the victim (state), who exercised this lien and is in front of the G construction site under management, the victim’s employees and the on-site security guards in advance of the G construction site in which the victim occupied and possessed the said site and entered the right of retention, and even after having heard the statement that the victim’s name is not the victim’s employees and the on-site security guards were not the victim’s exercise of the right of retention, they shall open the pent, L, K, and S installed on behalf of the fence.