Of the facts charged in the instant case, intimidation is acquitted.

From March 10, 2016, the Defendant, as the representative director of the (State) CC located in Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, the Defendant is a person who performs overall duties, such as managing buildings C and managing accounts, protecting the rights and interests of shareholders, etc.

The Defendant, in the Da located in Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, decided to keep the victim D’s store in operation with the trade name “E” and to take compulsory business suspension measures against the victim’s store following the civil petition of the residents in the other shop located in the Republic of Korea by avoiding disturbance due to civil disputes with F and E, and, in turn, had the victim’s store intruded into the victim’s store and stored the plastic contact in the store so that the victim is no longer able to operate the store.

At around 16:00 on September 20, 2017, the Defendant interfered with the victim’s E-store business by force by blocking the victim from entering the “E” store operated by the victim D, in order to prevent the victim from operating his/her business any longer, and entering the store without permission, entering the store in order to prevent the victim from operating his/her business.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Partial statement of witness D;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to interference with business, a warning letter, and a notification;

1. Relevant Article 319 (1) of the Criminal Act and Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of interference with business and the selection of fines) concerning criminal facts, the choice of punishment (the point of interference with business, the selection of fines);

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

1. Penalty fine of 500,000 won to be suspended;

1. Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act (100,000 won a day);

1. The defendant under Article 59(1) of the Criminal Code of the Suspension of Pronouncement of Sentence has divided his wrong facts and seriously reflected his wrong facts, and the defendant has the purpose of normal operation of C.