In the event that the Defendants did not pay the above fine, the Defendants did not pay the fine.

The Defendants, in collusion with D, E, F, and G on February 22, 2017, entered the management office of H apartment (hereinafter “instant apartment”) in Chungcheong-si, Chungcheong-si, Chungcheong-si, Chungcheong-si, Chungcheong-si, Chungcheongnam-do, and did not leave the said apartment after the I Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “I”) received notification of the termination of the apartment management contract from J (hereinafter “J”) as the owner of the said apartment, but did not leave the said apartment. As an employee I opened the said office in order to occupy the said office managed by the victim K, the managing director of the instant apartment of this case, and went into the said office through the entrance opened in order to prevent the victim from entering the said management office, and caused the key business operator from entering the said office to replace the entrance of the current office of the management office of this case with the entrance of the said apartment, thereby preventing the victim from using the said office’s computer.

Summary of Evidence

1. The Defendants’ respective legal statements (as stated in its reasoning, the purport that the Defendants entered the apartment management office of the instant apartment and extracted cable lines or installed entrances)

1. Each police statement protocol with respect to K, L, D, E, F, and G;

1. A contract for the entrusted management of multi-family housing;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes, such as field photographs and photographs of property damage;

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Articles 314 (1) and 30 of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment;

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

1. The Criminal Procedure Act of the Provisional Payment Order.