beta
Text
1. Defendants shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.
2. The Defendants did not pay the above fine.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
Defendant
A is the representative director of E Co., Ltd., the Hosan Development Enterprise, and Defendant B is the representative director of F Co., Ltd., the affiliate of E.
On April 17, 2009, the above Corporation E received 11 lots of land within the area of JJ such as Kimhae-si G, H, and I from auction and completed registration for the development of tinsan.
1. Defendant B
A. On April 20, 2013, from around 20:00 to April 30, 2013, the Defendant conspired with K, a management director of the same company, and, on the ground that the victim M, who operates L, within the JJ Corporation, within the Kimhae-si, did not consent to the construction of tin industry E, the Defendant: (a) filed a permit to open a private road; (b) obstructed the victim’s business by interfering with the victim’s business by abusing the ownership of Ggdo connected to the above L refinery used by occupant and the general public as a road; and (c) stuffing the pipe (not less than 50m in diameter, a height of about 1.5m in height) on the floor; and (d) filled up the steel fence with a total length of about 60m in length, and installed it by installing it, thereby obstructing the victim’s business by force, such as preventing the removal and leaving the employees of the said L, products, and the release of raw materials.
B. On the ground that from around 20:00 on April 27, 2013 to May 2, 2013, the Defendant conspired with K, the Defendant, on the ground that the victim Qua operating N N N N N N N N and (ju) in the GJ from around 20:0 on the ground that it did not consent to the development of the E, the Defendant would not have consented to the construction of the E.m., the Defendant’s construction of the private road: (a) the permit for opening the private road was granted; and (b) the private road connected to the above N N N P’s emotional being used by the occupant and the general public as the road; (c) the Defendant asserted the ownership of the successful bidder’s auction on the non-line pipe and the pipe pipe (1.5-2m in length; approximately 40-50cm in width; and approximately 1.5-2m in height; and (d) the Defendant would interfere with the transportation of the P.N.’s product and its product.