Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

B. On January 26, 2013, on the ground that the victim D (n, 45 years of age) was not repaid to the Defendant with an amount equivalent to KRW 15 million, and around 23:45, the victim D was involved in the Fama club 3 room room in Asan-si E on January 26, 2013, and C, upon taking the victim D’s desire to “cincinc incination” at “cination of cinc inc incination,” the victim D with the becinc incining the becin and bec incining the bec in the process, and the victim took part in that process in the bec in the bec in the bec in the bec in the becin of the victim’s bridge, etc.

As a result, the defendant and C jointly carried out inspections around the slots that require approximately two weeks of treatment to the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of the witness D;

1. Police suspect interrogation protocol regarding C;

1. Statement of D police statement;

1. Determination of the defendant's assertion of each internal investigation report and accompanying documents

1. Although the summary of the assertion stated in the facts charged, the Defendant stated that “the gate hack hackk hackk hackk,” the Defendant did not compete with C, and there is no fact of participating in C’s violence.

2. According to the evidence revealed earlier, the Defendant: (a) had the victim who was not able to pay money to C, etc.; (b) had the victim’s sexual intercourse with C, etc.; (c) had the victim’s sexual intercoursed; (d) has threatened C with the victim who was not able to injure the beer; and (c) had the victim’s sexual intercoursed; and (d) the Defendant encouraged C, under these circumstances, the following acts by stating “the victim who was able to injure the beer who was able to receive money,” and followed C, followed C, broken the beer and the instant injuries to the beer; and (e) caused the instant injury to the victim by protruding the beer’s bridge, etc.

According to the above facts, not only the defendant and C have implied conspiracys on the whole crime of this case, but also the defendant's functional act on the crime of this case.