Defendants shall be punished by a fine of KRW 500,000.

The Defendants did not pay each of the above fines.

Punishment of the crime

On March 15, 2016, the Defendants entered into an oral contract at KRW 3,000,000 with the E store operated by the victim D in Daegu North-gu, Daegu-gu, Seoul-gu, on March 15, 201.

Afterwards, 2,900,000 won was refunded from the injured party with the knowledge that the Defendants did not move the building, but 100,000 won was not refunded.

1. On March 17, 2016, the Defendants sought 100,000 won of the down payment to the same place as the above at around 10:00.

Defendant

A is a change of fraud to the victim.

On the other hand, we should collect money from quasi-payment, tax base return, and double-payment.

It is the Doar Youth.

In this year, it is clear that funeral services will not be performed.

The Defendant B expressed the desire to “inducate to the tax base of the down payment,” and Defendant B received money on the part of the following: “The down payment, the down payment, the tax base of the down payment, and the tax base of the tax base of the down payment.”

“At least one hour after taking a bath,” and interfering with the victim’s two-hand sales business.

2. On March 21, 2016, the Defendants: (a) expressed the victim’s desire at the same place as above; (b) obstructed two-time sales by the victimized person for at least one hour; and (c) interfered with two-time sales by the victimized person.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Written statements of D;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes governing the settlement of complaints, each investigation report, and each 112 reported case;

1. Article 314(1) and Article 310 of the Criminal Act, and the selection of fines for the crime;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the same Act for the increase of concurrent crimes;

1. Part concerning dismissal of public prosecution under Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act, which is applicable to detention in a workhouse

1. Facts charged;

A. On March 17, 2016, at E stores operated by the victim D in Daegu Northern-gu, Daegu Northern-gu, the Defendants are replaced by the victim’s “the fraud” to the victim who is viewed by many and unspecified persons, such as the market merchant F, at E stores operated by the victim D.

It is the Doar Youth.

publicly insulting the victim; and

B. On March 21, 2016, the Defendants: (a) around 14:00, at the same time, considered many and unspecified persons, such as market merchants, F, etc. at the same place.