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

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

Punishment of the crime

1. On May 12, 2017, the Defendant: (a) demanded that the victim D(E, 57 years old) located in Ulsan-gu, Ulsan-gu, U.S. C use the toilet at “E” store; (b) however, the Defendant refused the victim’s “no toilet”; and (c) the Defendant did not want to use the toilet.”

Chewing Sheb. Sheb. Sheb.

Down 10 minutes, such as putting off “A”, led customers in the above restaurant to get out of the restaurant.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the victim's business of divided food store by force.

2. The Defendant, at the above date and at the above place, required the victim G (5 Doe) who was an inspector belonging to the F District of the Police Station in Ulsan-gu Police Station in receipt of the above D’s report, and the victim H (33 Doe) who was a policeman belonging to the same district group, to disclose his personal information and present his identification card to the Defendant. While there are the aforementioned D and 10 merchants, the Defendant released the victims from the Republic of Korea Doe Doe la and the Defendant “We Doe Doe Doe Doe Doe Dok to Chewing Doe Doe Doe Doe

Chewing sark sark

“The victim H does not wish the Defendant,” and the victim H does not wish to do so.

In the end, “Yek fran, flag, dead and discarded flag”

The Mesophical theory was expressed as “.....”

Accordingly, the Defendant insultd the victims each by openly.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on police statements made to H, G, and D;

1. Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of interference with business) and Article 311 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act among the ordinary concurrences (for each offense of insultment in judgment);

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. The defendant recommits the instant crime immediately after he/she was released from the prison due to interference with the performance of official duties of the same kind, etc. for the reason of sentencing under Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act, and the defendant commits several crimes of the same kind.