A defendant shall be punished by a fine of 500,000 won.

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

Punishment of the crime

1. On December 20, 2017, from around 16:40 to around 17:10, the Defendant interfered with his duties: “C hospital would have the president who had knee surgery on the ground that he refused to give medical treatment to himself,” and she would have knee surgery to the president’s room, and the staff, other than the victim D, who was an employee of the hospital who had been working in the next room, would stop this; and “the president would stop the hospital’s door without permission.” The Defendant avoided the disturbance, such as “A hospital would have knee surgery on the ground that she refused to give treatment to himself, and interfered with the treatment of patients of the above D and the above hospital employees.”

2. When the Defendant was prevented from intending to enter the president room in the same manner as Paragraph 1, at the same time and place as Paragraph 1, the Defendant assaulted the victim D(39 years of age) who prevented him from putting him out of fluor’s hand.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Witnesses D and E's respective legal statements;

1. Each statement of D and F;

1. Application of the statutes governing on-site CCTV CDs and CCTV images CDs;

1. Relevant Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act and the choice of a fine for the crime, the applicable Article of the Criminal Act and the choice of a fine for the crime;

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

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. As to the Defendant’s assertion of the provisional payment order under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the Defendant and the defense counsel asserts that the obstruction of business by the Defendant does not interfere with the victim’s business on the day, and that the act constitutes a justifiable act in the course of the Defendant’s attempt for hospital employees, such as D, to get off from the Defendant’s selling and leading.

In full view of the evidence duly adopted and examined in this court, the defendant.