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

At around 14:40 on November 15, 2018, the Defendant, at the “D hotel” operated by the victim C in Jung-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, the reason that he did not pay the agreed profits on the amount invested by the Defendant through the Defendant on the part of the said hotel, and did not take over the hotel. At the same time, the Defendant, along with six persons, such as E, introduced to this end, entered the above hotel, and let the female employees working in the knter get out of the hotel, intruded the above hotel operated by the victim, and interfered with the victim’s hotel operation duties by force over about 55 minutes.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness C and F;

1. Each police suspect interrogation protocol of E, G, and H;

1. Application of each police protocol of statement to I, F and J

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense, Articles 319 (1) and 314 (1) of the Criminal Act which choose the penalty, and the choice of fines;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Judgment on the assertion by the defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The asserted K borrowed money from L, and the victim took the right to operate the hotel and the right to benefit from the use of the hotel. Since the victim is the most lessee, the victim's business of operating the hotel does not fall under "business" under the Criminal Act concerning the crime of interference with business, and the defendant entered the hotel to exercise the right to operate the hotel in order to exercise the right to operate the hotel legally, there is no intention to interfere with the business.

In addition, since it does not have access to a hotel for the purpose of interfering with business, it does not constitute "influence" in the crime of intrusion upon a structure.

2. The term “business” subject to protection of the crime of interference with business under the Criminal Act is an occupation or continuous work, which is worth protecting from infringement by another person’s unlawful act.