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

The Defendant, at around 19:30 on May 14, 2015, found the main points of the operation of the victim D in Yangju-si C, without responding to the request of the victim for the withdrawal of the victim on the ground that the victim, who was in the past, did not contact the Defendant.

In order to avoid the disturbance of one hour, such as mashing, mashing, sitting the victim on the side of the defendant, etc., the customers who were above the victim were left from the above main point.

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the victim's main business by force.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to report on investigation (to hear statements from a victim telephone);

1. Article 314 of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime, Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act, the selection of fines, and the selection of fines;

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act requires a strict punishment for the Defendant, taking into account the fact that the Defendant had already been punished by a fine by committing an act of interference with business against the same victim as the instant case, even though he had already been punished by a fine.

However, in full view of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant led to the instant crime; (b) the Defendant appears to have committed the instant crime for about one month; (c) the victim does not want to be punished by the Defendant; and (d) the Defendant’s age, occupation, sex behavior; and (e) the details and circumstances after committing the instant crime, etc., the sentence shall be determined as ordered by taking into account the following circumstances: