Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

2. The judgment of the court below is justified in light of various sentencing factors indicated in the instant case, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, occupation and environment, background and result of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., comprehensively taking account of the following factors: (a) there was a history that the Defendant had been punished several times for the same type of crime; (b) the Defendant again committed the instant crime during the grace period despite being sentenced to suspended sentence due to the crime of interference with business; (c) there is possibility of re-offending in light of the Defendant’s power; (d) the Defendant did not perform his efforts to recover from damage; and (e) the Defendant did not perform his efforts to recover damage; and (e) the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, occupation and environment, the background and consequence of the crime; and (e) circumstances after the crime.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is with merit, and the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is again decided as follows.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts charged and the summary of the evidence recognized by the court are the same as the corresponding columns of the judgment of the court below, and thus, they are quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning facts constituting an offense, Articles 314 (1) and 311 of the Criminal Act (a point of interference with business), and the choice of fines;

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

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

1. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order;