In two months of imprisonment with prison labor for the facts constituting the crime as stated in Paragraph 1 of the judgment of the defendant, the facts constituting the crime as stated in paragraphs 2 and 3 of the judgment.

Punishment of the crime

[criminal records] The Defendant was sentenced to one year of imprisonment with prison labor for interference with the performance of official duties at the Seoul Western District Court on June 29, 2016 and was sentenced to two years of suspended execution on December 16, 2016, and the said judgment became final and conclusive and is still under suspended execution.

[Criminal facts]

1. On August 10, 2014, at around 05:30, the Defendant: (a) obstructed business affairs and damaged property: (b) demanded radioactive victims E, who are on night duty at “D Hospital” located in Gwanak-gu in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, to be hospitalized without conditions; (c) took two monitors on the floor of the nuclear department and the camera, which were installed on the ground that they were refused; (d) took one fingerprint on the floor; and (e) took one fingerprint on the floor, thereby damaging the property managed by the said victims; and (e) interfered with the duties of the original affairs and employees, including the said victims for about twenty (20) minutes by force.

2. On February 10, 2017, at the above D Hospital around 13:25, the Defendant: (a) explained to the victim F, who is the chief of the headquarters, that “the father’s medical record was changed” but is a family member; and (b) stated that “the president Ba, the head of the headquarters, and the head of the headquarters, have been changed; and (c) the victim F, who is the chief of the headquarters, was the head of the headquarters; and (d) caused the disturbance to interfere with the original work of the victim G, who is the chief of the headquarters, for about 10 minutes.

3. On February 16, 2017, the Defendant: (a) demanded that the Plaintiff produce the medical records of his father at the above D Hospital; (b) however, the said G was due to the defect that the said G would take the procedure, and (c) the Defendant’s x (x) on the front floor of the instant hospital’s automatic door gate in front of the instant hospital’s building, and then damaged the property in such a way as to impair the utility of 50,000 won at the expense of removing the said abortion from the Defendant’s home.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Results of this Court’s video CD verification;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of the suspect of the first and second prosecutor's office against the defendant;

1. Each police statement protocol with respect to E and G;

1. G statements;

1. Investigation Report (to hear the F Opinion of the Chief of the Victim Department) 1.