A A A shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,00,000, by a fine of KRW 1,000,000, and Defendant C shall be punished by a fine of KRW 700,00.

Defendant

From February 2015, A is the owner of a building with a single floor located in Yangsan City, which is located in the Republic of Korea and the owner of a building with a single floor located in the Republic of Korea in the Republic of Korea. Defendant B is the mother of Defendant A, who assists in the management of the building located in the Republic of Korea. Defendant C leases the single floor building located in the above H from Defendant A with a deposit of KRW 10 million, monthly rent of KRW 10 million, KRW 1 million, and the lease period of two years, and from February 2015, Defendant C is a pharmacist who operates “I pharmacy.”

1. On December 18, 2015, Defendant A and the Defendants demanded the victim C to bring the monthly rent of KRW 1 million to KRW 2 million, but they were rejected from the victim. However, on December 31, 2015, Defendant A and the Defendants demanded the victim to terminate the said lease agreement and leave the pharmacy at the pharmacy on the ground that the victim, who was the operator of the internal department, made a speech, such as slandering the Defendant A, who is the operator of the internal department.

Between that end, from that end to April 2016, the Defendants did not enter into a transaction with a large number of unspecified patients who have received treatment in the “A’s G Council members” against the said “I pharmacy” due to bad credit standing and did not pay the weak value, and thus, the wholesalers did not engage in the transaction.

There shall be no drug in a pharmacy, and the drug shall be lent in other places.

It does not prescribe the drugs as sub-leases, but entangled drugs.

The weak value shall also be enclosed by the highest value.

I speaks about the following facts: “A pharmacy is a horse,” “A pharmacy is another pharmacy,” and led patients to go to other pharmacies than I pharmacy.

As a result, the Defendants conspired to spread false facts or interfered with the operation of the victim C's pharmacy by fraudulent means.

2. Defendant C responded to this, and around January 4, 2016, at the immediately preceding I pharmacy, Defendant C was a patient who was a member of the medical department.

J callsing to the above J, recording the statement to the effect that the said J reads that the said J reads to the effect that “I am to the emergency room due to a side effect,” and then, the said recording is made to pharmacy customers, such as K in the city.