Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

1. Around 10:00 on February 6, 2015, the Defendant: (a) cut off the locks equivalent to KRW 8,000 in the market price, which is the victim’s ownership installed in the said construction site, to saw that the victim C’s exercise of the right of retention on the said newly constructed building at D Co., Ltd, the representative director, and then damaged the victim’s property by extinguishing one banner at the same place, which is equivalent to KRW 40,00,00, at the market price of the victim’s ownership.

2. The Defendant interfered with the business of interfering with the management of the victim’s right of retention by force by replacing the correction device with the locks continuously possessed by the Defendant at the time and place specified in paragraph (1) and allowing the victim not to enter the said site.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Entry of the prosecutor’s statement with C in the protocol;

1. Partial statement of the police suspect interrogation protocol against the defendant;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the police statement statement made to E;

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

(a) The point of causing property damage: Article 366 (Selection of Fine) of the Criminal Act;

(b) A point of interference with business: Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act.

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act (aggravating concurrent crimes within the scope of the sum aggregated with the maximum amount of two crimes);

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

1. It is so decided as per Disposition on the grounds of Article 186(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act or more of the cost of lawsuit;