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

Around 22:33 on March 31, 2015, the Defendant: (a) expressed the victim’s desire to call taxi numbers at “C” convenience stores located in Silung City B; (b) on the ground that the victim, an employee, would have been aware of the victim; (c) and (d) expressed the victim’s desire to “Chewing, Chewing, and the same year,” and interfered with the victim’s business convenience store business by force for about 10 minutes on the ground that the victim was able to take advantage of the victim’s 7 to 8 occasions in the course of drinkinging the 7 to 8 times in the course of going against the victim; and (d) continuously fell with other customers in the convenience store, and (e) the Defendant interfered with the victim’s business convenience store business by force for about 10 minutes.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of D police statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the investigation report;

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment;

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.