Defendants shall be punished by a fine of KRW 700,000.

If the Defendants did not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendants, while working at a G construction site located in F in the Si of Si of Si of Si of Si of Si of Si of Si of Si of Si of Si of Si of Si of Si of Si of Si of Si of Si of Si of Si of Si of Si of Si of Si of Si of Si of Si of Si of Si of Si of Si of Si of Si of Si of Si of Gu, the

On December 12, 2012, the Defendants: (a) found the victim H at the construction site of the above G at around 10:00, with the knowledge that the victim H would drive an I digging range and do the boundary stone; and (b) found the victim at the work site of the above G, the Defendant A, who did not comply with it, was forced to set up the digging range turn up to the digging range; and (c) the victim did not get off from the digging range, the Defendants, together with the victim, said the victim, “I will dick off the other vehicle, hick off the other vehicle, and hick off the other vehicle.”

As a result, the Defendants conspired and interfered with the victim's operation by force for about 20 minutes.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ legal statement

1. Application of the police statement law to H

1. Article 314 (1) and Article 30 of the Criminal Act applicable to the relevant criminal facts and the choice of punishment;

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order is that the Defendants were forced to find out the scene where the Defendants are working and forced to stop work at the scene where the victims are working in order to resist the situation where they are working at the site and work at the G construction site, and the Defendants did not have any right to prevent the victims from working at the outside site, and even if it is difficult for the Defendants to recognize that there was a practice in the equipment industry among the outside vehicles, the Defendants were difficult to recognize that there was a practice in the equipment industry.