Defendant

A, B, C, D, E, F, and G each fine of KRW 500,000,000, Defendant H, I, J, K, K, L, M, M, N,O, P, Q, Q, M, T, U, and V, respectively.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendants were co-owners of the second floor of WY X-gu, Busan, and were the co-owners of the second floor of WY, and were willing to stop construction by occupying the construction site on the ground that the victims, victims, victims AA, victims AB, and victims AC were trying to perform internal artificial test work on the second floor of the above straight board, and that they did not obtain the Defendants’ consent.

From August 8, 2017 to January 26, 2018, according to the above invitation, the Defendants installed tents, chairs, and tables on the second floor of the above straight board, and kept the number of persons living in shifts each day so that they may not enter or leave the construction materials, and during the same period, the Defendants interfere with the work of the victims by force by preventing the victims from entering the construction by preventing their entry of construction materials or by preventing them from entering the construction vehicles, while staying in the first floor of the above straight board for the same period.

Summary of Evidence

1. The Defendants’ partial statements in the first trial record;

1. Partial statement of AD of a witness (Provided, That for the defendant A, the part of the witness AD in the third protocol of the trial);

1. Statement made by a witness AC in the second protocol of trial;

1. The first police statement to AC;

1. Evidence of interference with business (the defendant, AD et al., and 26 persons), photographs of the scene of the case, and photographs of the damaged doors;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to each investigation report (referring to submission of a written contract for interior works and a modified contract, on-site investigation and confirmation of the state of access to damage) (in common among the defendants);

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Articles 314 (1) and 30 of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment for the crime (generality of fines and selection of fines);

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

1. Judgment on the assertion by the Defendants and the defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The assertion that the crime of interference with business does not constitute business;

A. The Defendants and the defense counsel are first asserted, and they are the Defendants.