However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

The Defendant, in the name of “C” in Sejong City B and 3 floors, was a person operating a room at the time, and the Defendant instructed the victim E (17 years old) who is a juvenile at the time when the juvenile’s access was prohibited, to be located in the “Fpeption room” operated by D during two times. However, during the investigation process of the instant case, the Defendant stated that the victim was instructed by the Defendant during the investigation process that the victim was in receipt of the direction from the Defendant.

D) Accordingly, on July 18, 2017, the defendant filed a complaint against the charge of interfering with the duty of the police, and the defendant received a notice of attendance from the police about the above complaint case, and the defendant was aware of his criminal act, so that the victim could reverse the police's statement.

around 18:30 on July 19, 2017, the Defendant: (a) driven by D on the top of a high-lodial reservoir in the same city, owned by the Defendant, prior to the HPP, to the building located in G on July 19, 2017, to the entrance of a high-lodial reservoir in the same city; (b) operated by D, prior to the building located in HPP, to the entrance of the vehicle located in the same city; (c) on the vehicle,

followed. Does the complainant go to her seated;

Does the other side of the case;

whether a statement was made to the police station;

n If you know, why you end, or why you do so;

There was no scam, and there was no knife with the knife, etc.

It is necessary to reverse the statement to the police and re-written the statement. The statement must be re-written to the police, and it should not be re-written even if it is externally, and even if it is out of the night, it should not be re-written.

“Intimidating the victim to make a false statement to the effect that the victim voluntarily reported the victim without the direction of the defendant.”

In this respect, the defendant threatened the victim to perform an act of non-performance of obligation.

Summary of Evidence

1. The first time;