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

The Defendant is a guest who sells rice in a public place, and the victim B (the age of 58, the female) visits a restaurant with the name of "C" from the side of the public place.

At around 19:10 on July 27, 2018, the Defendant visited the above restaurant in the public room adjacent to the restaurant, “C,” and prevented the victim B from moving his vehicle in the victim B to a street, which he wanted to return home, and sold a 1stud of rice (2kg) to the victim by threatening, threatening, “The intention to park and leave the vehicle in the south’s private land is Domine,” and threatening the victim to 8,000 won.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each statement of B and E;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to report internal investigation (victim B telephone communications);

1. Relevant Article 324 (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. The portion not guilty under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order

1. Of the facts charged in the instant case, the Defendant’s obstruction of business is a person who sells rice in a fairter, the victim F (39 years old, south) is a person who operates a restaurant in the name of “C” in the name of “C,” and B (58 years old, female) visits the restaurant.

On July 27, 2018, around 19:10, the Defendant obstructed the victim F restaurant operation by exercising authority, such as taking a bath to sell rice by borrowing a vehicle from a guest who visited the said restaurant in a public room, “C,” a restaurant, and taking a vehicle reading center on a public room.

2. In full view of the following facts and circumstances revealed by the records of judgment, the defendant has an intentional intent to interfere with the business of the victim F restaurant operation.

It is difficult to recognize that the defendant's act constitutes an act that obstructs the victim F's restaurant operation.

The defendant, who took a bath against B, and hanged rice reading center, etc., shall be used exclusively for the defendant, who belongs to the victim F's entrance in the restaurant or the restaurant site at the victim F's entrance.