Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 500,000.

Where the defendant fails to pay the above fine, one hundred thousand won shall be one day.

Punishment of the crime

1. Around 15:00 on February 20, 2014, the Defendant obstructed the operation of the Victim’s Child Care Center by force for about 30 minutes, including “E” operated by the Victim D (hereinafter “E”) under the name of the Child Care Center, “I will close down the facility. I will continue to do so.” In addition, the Defendant interfered with the operation of the Victim’s Child Care Center by force for about 30 minutes, such as “I will remove all electric wires for the monitoring of the business-related computer in its place, and try to go on the floor while going on the floor.”

2. On February 26, 2014, around 19:15, the Defendant damaged the locking device to make the victim pay a hole to the locking device, which is owned by the victim, on the ground that the victim does not open the door gate of the child care center, in front of the above child care center entrance on the ground that the victim does not have to do so without giving the necessary documents to the closed door of the child care center.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement made to D or F;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to each statement;

1. Relevant Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act and Article 316 of the Criminal Act (the point of interference with business, the choice of fines) concerning the crime, the choice of punishment, and Article 366 of the Criminal Act;

1. Of concurrent crimes, Articles 37 (former part), 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act (aggravating concurrent crimes within the scope of the sum of the maximum amount of the crimes above two crimes, which are determined by the crime of interference with business heavier than the punishment);

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

1. The original fine shall be reduced in consideration of the fact that the damage and damage to property subject to Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act was recovered, the circumstances of the instant case, the relationship with the victim, etc.