Defendant shall be punished by a fine of 1.5 million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Punishment of the crime

1. On January 12, 2015, the Defendant: (a) was suspected of having a 'D' restaurant operated by the victim C in the wife B, the wife of the Defendant; (b) was suspected of having an inhumanity relationship with the husband of the Defendant; and (c) was found to have an inhumanity relationship.

“A sound is string,” and approximately 30 minutes of heavy disturbance was satisfying, such as cutting the chair and cutting the water reservoir and water reservoir on the floor.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the victim's restaurant operation by force.

2. On May 1, 2015, at around 15:00, the Defendant damaged the property: (a) the victim C (at the age of 69) operated the above “D” restaurant; (b) the victim did not have engaged in commercial sex acts in the said restaurant; and (c) the victim did not have engaged in commercial sex acts in the said restaurant; and (d) notwithstanding that the victim was not a woman, the Defendant stated the phrase “i.e., chewing funeral, women’s house, and family damage crime,” in the color-type pen as soon as possible on the match of the outer wall of the restaurant.

Accordingly, the defendant damaged the repair cost by making a abortion in the space owned by the victim, which is about KRW 500,000.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Application of the police statement protocol law to C

1. Relevant Article 314 of the Criminal Act, Articles 314 (1) and 366 of the Criminal Act, the selection of fines for criminal facts, and the selection of fines for negligence;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

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

1. The part dismissing a public prosecution under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act against the order of provisional payment

1. On May 1, 2015, the Defendant: (a) around 15:00, at around 15:00, entered the instant “D” restaurant operated by the victim C (at 69 years of age); (b) there was no fact that the victimized person engaged in commercial sex acts in the said restaurant; and (c) notwithstanding that the victim is not a woman, the Defendant stated the terms, such as “Chewing funeral, women’s house, and home destruction crime,” in the color-type pen as soon as possible on the match of the outer wall of the restaurant.

Accordingly, the defendant's honor by openly pointing out false facts.