Defendant shall be punished by a fine of two million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant had been living together with the victim B (V, 52 years old) before about 15 years.

1. On May 23, 2019, at the restaurant room operated by the victim in Daegu Northern-gu C on May 23, 2019, the Defendant: (a) made a suspicion of the victim’s inhumanial relationship; (b) made a dispute with the victim; and (c) demanded the victim to have sexual intercourse; and (d) made the victim refuse to demand the sexual relationship; (b) made the victim’s demand for the sexual intercourse, two portable gases, a dangerous thing, as hand hand, biffing the victim into a hand, and sound the victim “the same kills.”

Accordingly, the defendant carried dangerous objects and threatened the victim.

2. At around 07:10 on May 23, 2019, the Defendant obstructed the victim’s restaurant business by force, by means of force, such as: (a) the victim’s internal arrangement of the restaurant in order to prepare for the part of the restaurant; (b) the victim’s alteration of the inside of the restaurant on the same grounds as the description of Paragraph 1 of the defect; (c) the victim’s alteration of the victim’s “Isn’t know about his/her loss”; and (d) the victim’s alteration of the volume per hour of the gas to return to the unclaimed customers who found in the restaurant.

Summary of Evidence

1. The police statement concerning B;

1. A photograph of a CCTV closure;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes governing the 112 Reporting Case Handling Table;

1. Relevant Articles 284 and 283(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act and Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of fines for the crime;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. The reason for sentencing under Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act in the custody of the workhouses is that the Defendant threatened the victim by leaking carbon gas as the victim did not comply with his/her request, and further, the Defendant interfered with the restaurant business of the victim by force.

However, the fact that the defendant recognizes the crime as a substitute and reflects the depth, the victim does not want the punishment of the defendant, and even though the judgment of divorce was rendered, the victim is about 15 years thereafter.