A defendant shall be punished by a fine of 500,000 won.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

On April 17, 2015, the Defendant sought victim E in the Seongbuk-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City Da-gu 5-story D Housing Management Office around 16:43 on April 17, 2015, and then “the president has taken place.”

Haba Habin anywhere

In addition, although F and G "Ign't have been the President," F and G were "Ign't have been why they had been called a bicycle and a shoes."

Whether the president has become aware of the telephone, or not, the telephone;

“A bicycle, etc. in a corridor” refers to a bicycle, etc. in a corridor, and a business registration certificate, customer confirmation mark, etc. kept in a cell phone office without permission, which was kept in a continuous cell phone office, was taken, and the employee who has prevented it from being taken the interview with the news, and “Nonson’s superior” was taken.

approximately five minutes of force, such as “,” interfere with the management of affairs of the victim’s employees.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness E, F and G;

1. Application of CCTV-cape photographs and video-related Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the relevant criminal facts and Article 314 (1) of the Selection of Punishment;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The judgment on the defendant's assertion under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act against the defendant's assertion of the provisional payment order is that the injured person entered the office to correct the obstruction of passage by having a bicycle and a new decoration, etc. on the corridor, which is a common area, and this is not unlawful because it does not violate social rules. However, the evidence of the judgment reveals that ① there was no objection regarding the victim's passage interference before the date and time of entry of the crime, and ② the defendant took photographs within the office with a large voice of the victim's employees, regardless of whether he was the victim's employees, and ③ the employee reported to the police.