If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won is paid.

[Criminal Experience] Class I and the case: The judgment of the Seoul Western District Court rendered on March 28, 2012: Imprisonment with prison labor for the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties: Ten months: the lapse of two years: July 13, 2012; the judgment of the Seoul Western District Court was rendered on April 4, 2013 (the crime committed between May 15, 2012 and May 16, 2012): the lapse of two years of imprisonment with prison labor for 4 months: the judgment of April 12, 2013 and the case before the third: the Seoul Western District Court rendered on May 14, 2015 (the crime committed on December 8, 2014) and the judgment of the defendant was held on March 21, 2015 (the Seoul Western District Court’s imprisonment for a crime committed on December 28, 2014): the judgment of the defendant was held on March 21, 2015 (the Seoul Western High Court’s imprisonment for 203 years).

Summary of Evidence

1. B written statements;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to transfer certificates;

1. Article 1 applicable to the relevant criminal facts and Article 1 subparagraph 51 of the former Punishment of Minor Offenses Act (Amended by Act No. 11401, Mar. 22, 2013);

1. The latter part of Article 37 and Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning concurrent crimes;

1. Articles 70 and 69 of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The statutory punishment for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the Provisional Payment Order (in the case of a fine of 100,000 won or less, a fine of 200,000 won or less (in the case of a fine of 50,000 won or less per day): Article 23 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings under Article 19 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Summary Trial (in the case of a fine of 50,000 won or more per day), and Article 19 of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act (in the case where the whereabouts of the accused cannot be confirmed within six months after a report on the impossibility of delivery to the accused was received), but a decision without the attendance of the accused pursuant to Articles 458(2) and 365 of the Criminal Procedure Act (amended by the absence of the accused two times on January 15, 199);