In the event that the Defendants did not pay the above fine, only 50,000 won.

The Defendants were the believers of Gangseo-gu Seoul church, and the F is in dispute with the F in order to decide whether to perform the F’s position as a pastor of the above church, and the F applied for provisional disposition on October 25, 2012 against Defendant B, etc. to the Seoul Southern District Court for the prohibition of obstruction of worship, etc. on the provisional disposition on the provisional disposition on October 25, 2012. On November 7, 2012, the above court attached a notice stating the purport of the above decision that “Defendant B, etc. shall not interfere with F’s worship.”

1. On November 16, 2012, Defendant A removed at will the above notice attached to the front door of the above church, thereby impairing the effectiveness of the indication of compulsory disposition that public officials performed in relation to their duties.

2. Around November 22, 2012, Defendant B arbitrarily removed the foregoing notice (a) attached to the said church’s entrance (around November 10, 2012, which was found and attached by F to the lower part of the front line of the front line) from a public official’s office, thereby impairing the effectiveness of indication of compulsory disposition that the public official performed in relation to his duties.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. The police statement concerning F;

1. A complaint;

1. Notices of public notice;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to the provisional disposition ruling, inspection protocol of provisional disposition and protocol of execution of provisional disposition;

1. The Defendants: Article 140 (1) of the Criminal Act (Selection of Fine)

1. Defendants to be detained in a workhouse: Articles 70 and 69(2) of the Criminal Act

1. Defendants of the provisional payment order: It is so decided as per Disposition on the grounds of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act or more.