However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Since around 2009, when management expenses for the above building were delinquent due to the management expenses for the above building, the defendant thought that he would receive certain amount of management expenses for the sectional owners of the above building who did not have any relation to the delinquent management expenses, and that he would not supply electricity if the sectional owners did not pay the management expenses.

On April 18, 2012, the Defendant: (a) prevented the electricity supplied to the said B building 313 and 607 on April 30, 2012 on the ground that the victim C, who had acquired ownership of the said building and carried on the leased business, through an auction on April 18, 2012, did not pay management expenses; (b) did not supply electricity until November 28, 2012, by blocking the electricity supplied to the said building 313; and (c) on the same ground, the Defendant prevented the electricity supplied to the said building 607 on July 6, 2012 and did not supply electricity until March 7, 2013.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the victim's real estate lease business by force.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement by the prosecution against C;

1. Reference photographs;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (attached to written decisions);

1. Relevant Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act and Article 314 (1) of the same Act for the selection of applicable criminal facts (or, in general, choice of imprisonment);

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Probation and community service order under the proviso of Article 62-2(1) and the proviso of Article 62-2(2) of the Criminal Act, the Defendant’s reason for sentencing under Article 62-2(1) of the Social Service Order Act, by suspending a long-term supply of electricity without legal grounds, causing considerable damage to a new sectional owner

However, the fact that the defendant acted as a de facto manager in the past and leads to the crime of this case as concern of the suspension of the whole building, was consulted with the emergency countermeasure committee consisting of sectional owners, and that the purpose of the provisional disposition decision of the court is being carried out after it was issued, and the defendant is identical to the defendant.