If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

On March 8, 2019, the Defendant received a provisional protective order, including that the Defendant does not transmit codes, language, sound, or image to the victim B (the age of 38) by means of a Handphone, etc.

A domestic violence offender subject to an order for temporary protection shall comply therewith.

Nevertheless, at around 10:57 on March 25, 2019, the Defendant sent letters to the victim’s handphone with the victim’s handphone, and in the same manner, sent letters to the victim more than 130 times from the above date to June 5, 2019, such as the list of crimes in the annexed sheet.

Accordingly, the defendant did not comply with the above ad hoc protection order over 130 times.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. B written statements;

1. Provisional internment order;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes on message output;

1. Relevant Article 63 (1) 2 and Article 55-4 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Crimes of Domestic Violence and Selection of Fines concerning Crimes of Domestic Violence;

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

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act is as follows: (a) the victim was divorced from the Defendant on November 2018, 2018; (b) the victim did not show his/her child until around 2019; (c) the Defendant continued to appear to have given his/her child to the Defendant; (d) the victim appears to have not given any answer; (c) there were circumstances to consider the situation where the victim could have been given no answer; (d) the Defendant did not have contacted the victim, other than text messages; (e) the Defendant did not have any contact with the victim; (e) regardless of the temporary protection order, there were visitation rights of the Defendant regardless of the temporary protection order, and even if the victim could not arbitrarily limit them, the case occurred by arbitrarily restricting them; and (e)