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

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

Punishment of the crime

1. On October 3, 2017, the Defendant violated the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act: (a) around 21:00, the Defendant was on board a D taxi operated by Seodaemun-gu Seoul on the front of the 45 sand market located in the 2-lane 45 sand market; and (b) the Defendant did not pay a taxi fee of KRW 9,000,000, even when he arrived at the front of Seodaemun-gu Seoul, the destination of which was scheduled

Accordingly, even though the defendant was on board a business vehicle, the defendant did not impose a value without justifiable reasons.

2. On October 3, 2017, the Defendant was unable to avoid disturbance for about 40 minutes, such as taking a bath for the victim, continuing opening the back door of the lighting, despite the victim C, who recommended the victim C to pay a taxi fee and return home on the front of the Seodaemun-gu Seoul, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul around October 21, 2017.

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the victim's taxi operation by force.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against C;

1. Application of the receipt statute

1. Relevant provisions of the Act on the Punishment of Minor Offenses, Article 3(1)39 (a) of the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act (a point of non-election), Article 314(1) (a) (a point of interference with business) of the Criminal Act, and the choice of fines, respectively, for the crimes;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the same Act (to the extent that the amount is aggregated) shall be aggravated for concurrent crimes;

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is that the Defendant, on May 18, 2017, was sentenced to one year of suspension of execution and one year of protection observation for the crime of bodily injury. The Defendant committed the instant crime on August 8, 2017 when he/she was under protection and observation, and the Defendant committed the instant crime on November 9, 2017, even if he/she was placed at the place of the commission of obstruction of business and assault (the issuance of a summary order of KRW 3 million as of November 9, 2017, the Seoul Western District Court Decision 2017 High Court Decision 8915).

However, it is confirmed that the defendant's mistake, damage is relatively minor and agreed with the victim, and that the protection observation is relatively proper, and that it is aged 74 years old and is considered as a group of dementia and risk.