Defendant

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

Defendant

If A does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

Defendants are married with a couple, and the victim C(n, 36 years of age) is an optician with the police officer within D.

The Defendants: (a) made a call due to the lack of repair even though Defendant B was able to leave the border used by Defendant B to repair the border; and (b) made a call due to the call; and (c) the victim received the call did not know of the exact contents; and (d) found Defendant B as a warning source on the ground that the victim was not aware of the exact contents.

Defendants on April 20, 2018, around 17:20 on the 17:20 on the 20th day of the Jeonjin-gu E-D on the street, and Defendant A, on the 1st day of the 20th day of the 20th day of the 20th day of the 20th day

There is a warning to king the customer, and how it is possible to find it, but if it is hard to find it;

Does it be the case if it is so called that the crime is sent;

It is how to operate this ceremony.

D. The Defendant B interfered with the business by force of approximately two minutes, such as 7-8 times of 7-8 prudent flabing the face of the victim, and the high sound of the victim’s face, Defendant B interfered with the business by force.

Accordingly, the Defendants jointly interfered with the victim's safe sale of goods.

Summary of Evidence

1. Part of the Defendants’ legal statements

1. Each police statement with respect to C and F;

1. A survey report (related toCCTV analysis);

1. Application of each statute on photographs;

1. Article 314(1) and Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act regarding criminal facts and the choice of punishment (the Defendants)

1. Punishment to be suspended (Defendant B) 500,000 won;

1. Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act (in the case of Defendant B, 100,000 won per day)

1. Article 59(1) of the Criminal Act (Article 59(1) of the suspended sentence (Article 59(1));

1. The assertion by the Defendants of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act and the judgment on the provisional payment order (Defendant A)

1. The summary of the argument is that the defendant A does not fit the victim with an article, and the defendant B is infinite to the victim, and there is no sound mind.

2. The judgment is based on the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court.