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

The Defendant, at around 11:54 on June 26, 2018, was living together with D and fights in front of the cafeteria “C” restaurant located in Gumi-si B, Gumi-si on June 26, 2018.

Upon receipt of the 112 report stating “,” the police officer sent to the site and confirmed whether there was any damage, and then processed the site closure.

The Defendant thought that from 16:13 to 20:02 on the same day, the victim was reported in front of the G cafeteria operated by the victim F (n, 63 years of age) in the Gu, Sinsi E, and that the victim reported the above 112 report to the victim.

The h.h. h. The h. h. the h. the h. h. the h. the h. h. the h. h. the h. h. the h. h. the h. h. h. the h. h. the h. h. h. the h. h. h. the h. h. h. the h. h. h. h

Chewing elderly governance today makes it possible to see aftermathing.

In that way, it interfered with the business of the victim's restaurant by force to avoid disturbance, such as taking a bath to "mad."

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A written statement;

1. Investigation report (related to on-site photographs), investigation report (limited to attachment to ctv photographs and video storage clocks);

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of a reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, report on investigation, and applicable Acts and subordinate statutes to the personal confinement status;

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 of the Criminal Procedure Act was that the Defendant had a record of being subject to criminal punishment on several occasions for violent crimes, and the Defendant interfered with the victim’s restaurant business by avoiding disturbance at the victim’s restaurant without being able to do so even though he was during the repeated period due to violent crimes.

However, the Defendant recognized the entire crime of this case and reflected it.

The defendant has agreed with the victim smoothly.