When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

On October 28, 2018, around C 00:14, the Defendant expressed D’s desire to “Isscis and d’t come to me,” on the ground that D’s scisf or employee, “Iscisf, Iscisf,” and stated that “Iscisf, Iscisf, Iscisf, and d’s son, the victim E, who is the manager of the scisf, is unable to come to me,” and that “Iscisf, Iscisf, Iscisf, and die. Iscisf, Iscisf, Iscisf, Iscisf, Iscisf, Iscisf, Iscisf, Iscisf,” and made it difficult for the victim to take the police to have a d’s phone call reported by the victim, scisf, etc.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the victim's privacy or business by force.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. Photographs;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (audio file analysis);

1. Relevant Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of a fine, and the choice of a fine;

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

1. It is so decided as per Disposition for not less than Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act.