If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won shall be one day.

At around 14:20 on April 20, 2020, the Defendant was unable to have avoided a disturbance for about 20 minutes on the grounds that the Defendant had different opinions with the victim in relation to the redevelopment of the E area at the “D” restaurant operated by Seodaemun-gu Seoul, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, on the ground that there was an objection with the victim in relation to the redevelopment of the E area.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the victim's restaurant business.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement of the police statement of the defendant C in court;

1. A written statement of C and F;

1. 112 reported case handling table;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a report on investigation (verification of CCTV generated);

1. Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes;

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

1. The dismissal part of the prosecution under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The summary of the facts charged was around 14:20 on April 20, 2020, at the “D” restaurant operated by Seodaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, the Defendant: (a) performed an act of interference with the duties of the Defendant, such as the crime of interference with the duties in the preceding case; (b) performed an act of interference with the duties of the Defendant, such as the crime of interference with the duties in the preceding case; and (c) carried the body of the victim.

Accordingly, the defendant assaulted the victim.

2. Determination

(a) Crimes of non-compliance with will: Article 260 (3) of the Criminal Act;

B. On August 17, 2020, after the prosecution of this case, the victim expressed his intention not to punish.

(c) Judgment dismissing public prosecution: Article 327 subparagraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act;