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

1. Around 12:55 on May 30, 2018, the Defendant interfered with the business of the Victim B: (a) at the “D” laund operated by the Victim B located in Bupyeong-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, Bupyeong-gu, on the ground that the immediately preceding laund reported the Defendant, who was the Defendant who was diving before the laundry, was broken down and reported to the police; (b) the said laund at the distance of the laundry; and (c) the victim “at any time interfered with the business;”

Whether he/she is a crime that he/she sits.

D. The Plaintiff was unable to avoid disturbance for about one hour, such as “conscising in good faith.”

2. On May 31, 2018, the Defendant obstructed the victim E’s business at the “G” convenience store operated by the victim E in Bupyeong-gu, Incheon on May 22:30, 2018, the Defendant was unable to avoid disturbance for about 20 minutes, for the following reasons: (a) the Defendant expressed the victim’s desire not sell alcohol to the Defendant under the influence of alcohol; (b) the Defendant H in the place of his/her employee under the control of the Defendant Had the Defendant’s noise with “poper salathro, B, B, and B.”

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with each business of laundry and convenience stores of victims by force over two occasions.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Statement made by the police for B and E;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes of Chapter five to the screen by cutting off CCTV CDs and each CCTV course;

1. Relevant Article 314 of the Criminal Act and Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act and the selection of fines for the crime;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

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

1. Although punishment of imprisonment was imposed repeatedly for the same kind of crime for the reason of sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the repeated crime committed again during the period of repeated crime, and thus, the crime of this case was committed under the influence of alcohol.

The case where it is difficult to strictly punish because it does not show the appearance of argument and reflect. However, it is necessary to improve the quality of the case by being hospitalized immediately before each crime of this case, being treated as alcohol addiction, and being hospitalized again in the hospital after this case.