Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 7,000,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, the amount of KRW 100,000 shall be paid.

Punishment of the crime

1. On February 24, 2017, from around 04:15 to around 04:35, the Defendant interfering with his/her duties, as a larger rily, in the state of alcohol in the “F” restaurant operated by the victim E in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, “F” in the state of alcohol;

Handphonephones in the country;

If soon as possible, it should not be opened.

C. D. C. B. B. B. D.’, while taking a bath, he was able to avoid disturbance for about 20 minutes, such as cutting off the table table with a string, cutting down the gas burner on the table, which was on the table, and cutting down the studs into the floor.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the victim's restaurant business by force.

2. The Defendant destroyed property at the time, at the time, and at the place mentioned in the above paragraph, set the table table, which is the victim’s possession, and then cut the gas burner on the floor by cutting off the table table with hand, and breaking it up to the bottom. The Defendant was able to repair the gas burners equivalent to 15,000 won.

Accordingly, the defendant damaged the victim's property.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A protocol concerning the interrogation of each police suspect against the accused;

1. Each written statement of E and G;

1. Each investigation report (related to the verification of CCTV images records, attachment of damaged tables and gas burner photographs, and estimate of damaged articles) shall be applied to each investigation report (where a suspect commits a crime, related to the verification of CCTV images records, and attachment of damaged tables and

1. Relevant Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 316 of the Criminal Act (the point of interference with business), Article 366 of the Criminal Act, and the selection of fines for a crime;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated 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 is punished strictly in that he/she commits the instant crime without being aware of during the period of suspension of execution due to the same kind of crime.

However, considering the degree of business interference and damage, the crime of this case itself is intended.