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

The defendant is a person who works as a delivery source in a restaurant operated by the injured party.

around 19:00 on January 9, 2017, the Defendant: (a) sought money from the victim E, who is the head of the restaurant at this place, without going to work in Sungnam-si C, Sungnam-si; and (b) sought money from the restaurant operator at this place; (c) caused damage to the floor by cutting off the kids connected to the kids on the floor, along with the table table in which the Defendant was going to work in this place.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Legal statement of witness E;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to photographs of damaged damage, investigative reports (to hear the statements of the victim), investigation reports (a summary of the facts of damage inflicted on the victim), investigation reports (to hear the F phone statement from the witness - whether the witness is damaged, such as sporess, etc. -), investigation reports (to hear the statements from the witness G phone - whether they

1. Article 366 of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting a crime and Article 366 of the choice of punishment;

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

1. In light of the following circumstances: (a) the sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the Criminal Procedure Act (amended by Act No. 334(1) was agreed at an investigative agency on the grounds of sentencing; (b) the victim wants to punish the defendant; (c) the defendant has the same record as the defendant; and (d) the fact that the defendant led to confession by this court; and (d) the value of the damaged property is not so large; and (e) the defendant’s age, sex behavior, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime; and (e) the punishment shall be determined by comprehensively taking account of various sentencing conditions under Article 51 of the Criminal Act, including the circumstances after the crime, etc.

Rejection of Public Prosecution

1. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant, as an employee of the D Chinese restaurant operated by Seongbuk-gu, Seongbuk-gu, Sungnam-si, Sung-si, Seoul Metropolitan City, by drinking alcohol on January 9, 2018, changed the amount of money to be paid to the Defendant, and as an employee of the D Chinese restaurant, by drinking alcohol.