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

1. Damage to property;

A. At around 13:00 on May 30, 2013, the Defendant: (a) obstructed the “D” restaurant operated by the victim C (n, 44 years old); (b) obstructed the horses from the victim; and (c) damaged the said victim’s market price on the table by gathering 1,000 won out of a place.

B. At around 13:10 on the same day as described in the above paragraph (a), the Defendant sought again at the above restaurant and took a bath to the victim that “I would see why the police box was disreported, I would see the vehicle in this Chewing, and see the restaurant in the restaurant, and then I would like to use the tape recorder to record the Defendant’s horses, and the victim got a tape recorder at the victim’s market price at KRW 80,000,000, and damaged it by breaking it out.

2. From the date and time stated in paragraph (1) to 14:00 on the same day, the Defendant interfered with the Defendant’s business, by force, prevented customers from entering the said restaurant by avoiding disturbance due to the following: (a) from entering the said restaurant; and (b) putting the chair and the boomt, etc.; and (c) thereby obstructing the victim’s restaurant business by force.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to C by the police;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (attached photographs, etc.);

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and the choice of punishment for the crime, Article 366 of the Criminal Act, Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act (a point of interference with business), and the selection of fines for each crime (a point of multiple times, with the same records as those of the repeated crime period), although the crime was committed during the repeated crime period, it is against the mistake, the damage suffered by the victim is not significant, and the agreement with the victim is reached smoothly);

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act (Aggravation of concurrent crimes with punishment prescribed by the most severe crime of interference with business);

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

1. The dismissal part of the prosecution under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is 1.