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. On September 30, 2015, the Defendant interfered with the operation of the restaurant by a large amount of 30 minutes, including, without any justifiable reason, the victim, who is the business owner, was able to take a bath for customers, and sound for committing a noise, while under the influence of “E operated by the victim D” in the Suwon-si, Suwon-si, Suwon-si, the Suwon-si, which was operated by the victim D, at around 01:30, Sept. 30, 2015.

2. On June 29, 2016, the Defendant damaged the property in order to walk the road before G convenience stores located in the Suwon-si, Suwon-si, Suwon-si, which is under the influence of alcohol, and walked the road in front of G convenience stores located in the G convenience store in the Suwon-si, Suwon-si, Suwon-si, the Defendant damaged the property in order to walk the front and rear part of IK7 vehicles and the front and rear part of the driver’s seat, each at one time and walk the front and rear part of IK7 vehicles and the rear part of the driver’s seat in the market value.

Summary of Evidence

"2015 Highest 5055"

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A written statement of victim of D "2016 Highest 3782";

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A H statement;

1. Investigation report (in the face of a crime, attaching the video case investigation system), and the application of CCTV data photographic Acts and subordinate statutes to a suspect;

1. Relevant Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 316 of the Criminal Act (the point of interference with business), Article 366 of the Criminal Act, and the selection of fines for a crime;

1. Aggravation of concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act [to the extent that the aggregate of the amounts of concurrent crimes committed by a person interfering with heavier duties (the above two crimes shall be added up)];

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act was imposed on the Defendant for the same offense from 2008 to 2011. While the Defendant was sentenced to a fine on several occasions from 2008 to 2011, the Defendant was sufficiently aware of his violent inclinations in the instant crime, it is highly likely that the Defendant would be subject to criticism again for committing the instant crime.

However, all victims in this case shall be punished by the defendant.