Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

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

Punishment of the crime

The defendant has no relationship with the victim B (49 years of age, women) and his/her son C (18 years of age, women) in his/her duty.

1. On January 24, 2020, from around 15:49 to 16:12, the Defendant: (a) brought an article to the victim “I wish to be able to make a refund,” on the ground that the Defendant scrupted a walk that he purchased at the street log of the street store in front of the building D, Daegu-gu, Daegu-gu, from around 15:49 to around 16:12.

The Defendant obstructed the operation of the victim B’s street store by force for about 22 minutes, by keeping the victim’s son away from the victim’s son, and preventing other customers from using the board.

2. The Defendant assaulted, at the time and place specified in paragraph 1, the victim’s face part of the above victim’s face is 3 times to cellular phone reduction, and the victim’s body was tightly sealed by hand.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The images of the CCTV images taken by police investigation reports (Attachment to cellular phone photographs, etc. from the suspect) in B and C;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of the injury diagnosis certificate;

1. Relevant Articles 314(1) and 260(1) of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense, and selection of a fine;

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

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order is that the defendant's reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act does not meet the standard of genuine reflection, such as refusing the victim's mother to death in the criminal conciliation proceedings prior to prosecution. However, the fact that the defendant was committed during the formal trial and was an old person of distinguished service to the State, and that the defendant's age