Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 700,000.

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

Criminal facts

The Defendant, from around 12:40 on August 2, 2014 to 13:10 on the same day, intended to meet the president of the D Hospital’s 2nd dental center located in Ansan-si, Ansan-si, to receive a written agreement on a case under trial, but, on the ground that the victim E, the manager of the above hospital refuses to accept the agreement, he/she was able to teach the patient’s personality and desire to take a bath for the reason that the victim E, who is the manager of the above hospital, refuses to do so, and prevented the doctor of the hospital and the nurse from performing the medical treatment and left the patient, thereby obstructing the victim’s hospital management by force.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness F and E;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. Each report on internal investigation:

1. A written statement of F and E;

1. Application of the statutes governing on-site CCTV CDs;

1. Article 314 (1) and Article 313 of the Criminal Act concerning the relevant criminal facts, the choice of punishment, and the choice of fines;

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

1. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order;

1. The Defendant and the defense counsel on the assertion of the Defendant and the defense counsel under Article 186(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act that bear the costs of lawsuit did not interfere with the victim’s work by force, since they did not interfere with the victim’s work by force, on the grounds that the Defendant and the defense counsel did not go to the hospital as stated in the facts charged in order to obtain a temporary border agreement as stated in the facts charged. There was only a fact that they raised the speech due to the false remarks and non-personal treatment of the staff, such as the nurse in the place of the case.

In the crime of interference with business, the intent of the crime of interference with business does not necessarily require the intention of the purpose of interference with business or planned interference with business, but it is sufficient to recognize or anticipate the possibility or risk of causing interference with another person's business due to his own act, and its recognition or prediction is not only definite but also definite.