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

On March 3, 2015, the Defendant: (a) around 01:20 on March 3, 2015, the Defendant interfered with the victim’s restaurant operation by avoiding disturbance for about 30 minutes, such as “C” to the victim D, an employee of the Seoul Gwangjin-gu, on the ground that he did not refund the food cost; (b) threatening the beer of beer; and (c) threatening the beer Party E, a customer E, by gathering a snicking the Defendant’s spoke, and spokeing the Defendant; and (c) spokeing the Defendant with a large voice, “C to be spokeed, spokeed, and spokeed.” By force, the Defendant interfered with the victim’s restaurant operation by force.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. E prosecutorial statement;

1. Application of the police statement law to D;

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

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

1. The grounds for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act include: (a) the fact that the defendant has been punished several times by a fine due to violence; (b) the defendant reflects his mistake in depth; and (c) the victim does not want the punishment; and (d) the age and family relationship of the defendant should be comprehensively considered.