The injured party C is a person working as the head of the D apartment management office in Si interest, and the defendant A is the representative of apartment occupants, and the defendant B is the resident of the apartment.

From 13:30 on December 18, 2017 to 14:30 on December 18, 2017, the Defendants sound the victim, an apartment management office, “at the apartment management office,” as a matter of termination of the apartment management contract, Defendant A changed the key of the management office’s book to the victim to avoid the Defendants. Defendant A’s defect that the victim intends to get out of the management office. Defendant A forced the victim to check documents, cellular phone, etc., and Defendant B forced the victim’s possession, including the victim’s cell phone, and led the victim to the office.

Accordingly, the Defendants conspired and interfered with the victim's apartment management work by force for about one hour.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant A’s legal statement

1. The defendant B's partial statement

1. Application of the police statement protocol law to C

1. Relevant Articles 314(1) and 314(1) and 30 of the Criminal Act concerning the Defendants who choose to commit the crime;

1. Sentence Defendants: Fines of 500,000 won;

1. Defendants to be detained in the workhouse: Articles 70(1) and 69(2) (one hundred thousand won per day) of the Criminal Act;

1. The Defendants: (a) the Defendant’s assertion as to the Defendant’s assertion as to Article 59(1) of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., the first offense, motive for the crime, and scale of damage) is alleged to constitute a justifiable act, since Defendant B merely put the victim’s arms and put the documents in order to prevent apartment damage, and did not actively exercise physical power. However, Defendant B’s assertion is deemed to be an unlawful act inasmuch as the act of taking back the victim’s arms without authority and entering the towed while getting the victim’s arms are all deemed to be an unlawful act.