If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won shall be one day.

On March 5, 2017, around 03:10 on March 5, 2017, the Defendant, while going to a Dong that gets a D taxi operated by the victim C in Seongdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Pilotagedong, the victim went to the way and gets to the string of the taxi.

Therefore, when the victim needs to get off the taxi, the card settlement machine located in the taxi was sent to the victim, and the victim was able to take the bath at a large rate.

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the victim's taxi business by force as above.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of police statement protocol to E;

1. The pertinent Article of the Criminal Act, Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act, and Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of fines for criminal facts (the agreement was reached on March 5, 2017 with victims of interference with business affairs).

It is against the depth of the crime of this case committed by contingently.

It is clear that social ties are clearly and is in a position to wear a baby.

There shall be no criminal records exceeding a fine)

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

1. The part dismissing a public prosecution under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act against the order of provisional payment

1. Around March 5, 2017, the Defendant: (a) around 03:40 on March 5, 2017, at the Sungdong Police Station G District located in Seongdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, expressed the victim H of the said earth, who was affiliated with the said earth, with the victim of the said earth, who had the said taxi engineer and several police officers.

Accordingly, the Defendant insultd the victim publicly as above.

2. Determination

(a) Applicable legal provisions: Article 311 of the Criminal Act;

(b) Offenses subject to prosecution upon complaint: Article 312 (1) of the Criminal Act;

C. Submission of an agreement to the effect that on May 18, 2017, after the indictment of this case, the injured party does not want to be punished against the Defendant.

(d) Judgment dismissing a public prosecution: Article 327 subparagraph 5 of the Criminal Procedure Act;