beta
Text
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.
When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
On May 1, 2013, the Defendant, a de facto operator of B Co., Ltd., signed a contract with B Co., Ltd. to receive a contract for construction cost of KRW 1.777,300,000,000, which is to be constructed in E and three parcels of land, and transferred possession of the said building to the victim Co., Ltd. on September 30, 2014 after receiving a promissory note of KRW 230,000,000 for the construction cost from the victim Co., Ltd. on September 17, 2014.
1. On October 2015, the Defendant sent the entrance door door to the Defendant’s name-free employees and posted a banner, etc. to the effect that, on the grounds that the victim company did not pay the price agreed on the business building among the above newly constructed factories, the Defendant would not pay the construction cost.
Accordingly, the Defendant conspiredd with his nameless employees to the Dong among the factory buildings of the victim company, and interfered with the factory management work of the above company.
2. On December 2015, the Defendant, in collusion with a nameless employee, intruded into the factory building of the victim company in the same manner as that of paragraph 1, and interfered with the factory management affairs of the said company.
3. On February 2016, the Defendant, in collusion with a nameless employee, intruded into the factory building of the victim company in the same manner at the same place as stated in paragraph 1, and interfered with the factory management affairs of the said company.
Summary of Evidence
1. Partial statement of the defendant;
1. A protocol concerning the prosecutor's office or the police interrogation of the accused;
1. Statement made by the police against D;
1. An investigation report (a counter investigation of a lessee of a factory building) (the establishment of a obstruction of business does not require that the result of the obstruction of business would actually occur, and it is sufficient that the risk of the obstruction of business would occur (the Supreme Court).