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

On November 3, 2017, the Defendant, “2018 Go-si 99, the Defendant, at around 09:00 on the street of the Defendant in Jeju-si, and at around 09:0 on the street, the victim C (n, 51 years old), who was in dispute and was called on the part of the Defendant to stop the Defendant’s vehicle notification and parked the vehicle, and was called on the part of the police officer, the staff of the Dong office, and D, who was called on the part of the Defendant, was called on the part of the Defendant. The Defendant publicly insulting the victim by saying the victim “a kik who was called on the part of the police officer, the Dong office, and the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Application of the police statement protocol law to C

1. Relevant Article 311 of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of a fine, and the choice of a fine;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The portion not guilty under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, which is the order of provisional payment

1. The Defendant is a person who resides in Jeju-si B and raises 1 marith of miscellaneous species at the end of his/her residence.

At the entrance of the above dwelling place of the defendant, the defendant was located at the "E frequency" owned and leased by the defendant, and the above frequency of visitors had access to the above frequency, and the defendant's dwelling place was located in the same way as the above frequency of visitors, and the frequency of visitors who are not aware of the location of the above frequency can enter the place within the defendant's dwelling place to find toilets, etc. Thus, in such a case, the defendant has a duty of care to prevent the people from being able to prevent accidents in advance, such as combining the cafeteria at a place where the restaurant is difficult to enter, combining the opening to strings, or keeping warning signs so that they can be seen well at the entrance of the defendant.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and did not take a warning and blocking access, and instead, did so, did not extend to prevent the entry of the people to Defendant Morse, at around 21:00 on May 26, 2017.