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

On February 2, 2015, the Defendant: (a) around October 2012, on the building owned by the victim D Co., Ltd., Ltd. located in the Iron-gun, Gangwon-do; and (b) around around October 2012, the said building or the victim company requested the victim company to pay the construction cost to E, even though there is no legal relationship; and (c) installed a steel-resistant door and container stuff on the access road to the place; and (d) interfere with the victim’s interior construction work by force.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the witness F;

1. Partial statement concerning the suspect interrogation protocol of the defendant by the prosecution;

1. Partial statement of each police suspect interrogation protocol (including the G and H substitute part) against the defendant;

1. Statement of the police statement related to G;

1. Investigation reports (in addition to certified copies of donations, such as donations);

1. A copy of each letter of waiver of lien and a certificate of seal imprint;

1. On-site photographs (the defendant and his/her defense counsel asserted that the act identical to the facts constituting the crime was committed as part of the exercise of legitimate right of retention.

However, according to the above evidence, the Defendant: (a) completed construction on January 2012 regarding the above real estate; (b) had the owner E with a claim for the remainder of construction costs of KRW 192 million; (c) but failed to receive payment; and (d) E attempted to obtain a loan from the Gangnam Capital loan and pay part of the construction cost; and (c) in the process, the Defendant provided a loan to Gangnam Capital through the legal history a letter of waiver of lien and a certificate of seal impression around October 2012; (d) the Defendant received five million won from Gangnam Capital loan; (e) the Defendant sold the above real estate to the victim on January 22, 2015 after the purchase of the said real estate in the auction procedure at the discretion of the above building; and (e) the Defendant did not possess the said real estate after the preparation of each letter of waiver of a lien; and (e) had H install install a container on February 2015.

According to the above facts, the above lien is a lien.