If the defendant does not pay the above fine, the amount of KRW 100,000 shall be paid.

On February 11, 2014, at around 13:35, the Defendant: (a) expressed 13:35, the Defendant: (b) expressed the victim D’s desire to “I, but I would be able to ignore, I would like to know, I would like to know,” thereby obstructing the victim’s convenience store business by force.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made to D by the police;

1. Application of the photographic Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The dismissal part of the prosecution under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. On February 11, 2014, at around 13:35, the Defendant: (a) committed assault against the victim of spits (the age 45) who spits spits spit spit spit spit spit on the floor of the area by spit spit spit spit spit spit spit spit spit spit on the surface of the area of why spit spit spit spit spit spit spit " how spit spit spit spit spit spit spit spit spit spit spit spit spit spit spit spit spit

2. We examine the judgment. This part of the facts charged is a crime falling under Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act and cannot be prosecuted against the victim's express intent under Article 260 (3) of the Criminal Act. According to the records, the victim can recognize the fact that he/she has withdrawn his/her wish to punish the defendant on February 25, 2014, after the prosecution of this case was instituted. Thus, this part of the indictment is dismissed in accordance with Article 327 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act.

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.