Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,800,000.

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

Punishment of the crime

On October 19, 2017, the Defendant was sentenced to one year and eight months of imprisonment with prison labor at the Changwon District Court on October 27, 2017, and the judgment became final and conclusive on October 27, 2017.

On January 28, 2017, around 17:35, the Defendant ordered to make soup at the “D” restaurant operated by the victim C (n, 34 years of age) located in Busan Dong-gu B, Busan, but the Defendant did not provide so so even though the victim sold soup.

For the reason that “the victim” was refused, there is a number of customers and a store employee, etc., leading the victim at the place of “the same year of Nices, Chewing years, and internal taxi articles, and the driver is a taxi driver, and only the same year as the opening, and only the same day shall not be available.

Before doing a bath, the police officer, etc. who was dispatched to the site upon receipt of a report shall make the victim make it possible for the victim to see the victim to see the victim's "hing for the same year, hing, and hinginging for the same year."

Chewing, Chewing, is about 20 minutes, and the victim publicly insultingd for about 20 minutes.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against C;

1. Police investigation report (as to the situation at the time of dispatch to the scene), etc.

1. Complaint;

1. Previous conviction: Application of Acts and subordinate statutes concerning the results of case search;

1. Relevant Article 311 of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of a fine, and the choice of a fine;

1. After Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Article 39 (1) of the same Act:

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

1. The grounds for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act recognize the Defendant’s mistake and reflects his fault. The instant crime requires equity in the case of concurrent crimes between the obstruction of the first head’s duties in the judgment that became final and conclusive and the crime of this case’s concurrent crimes after Article 37 of the Criminal Act. In addition, the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and all other circumstances constituting conditions for sentencing, including the circumstances after the crime, should be comprehensively considered.