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

Around July 12, 1976, the Defendant and the victim C were married and divorced from Gwangju on December 1, 2014 by conciliation from the Appellate Court, and the house owned by the Defendant and the victim living in Gwangju Nam-gu was transferred to the victim on January 13, 2015 according to the above conciliation on December 1, 2014.

Since then, the defendant stated in the indictment that "the defendant does not have any disadvantage to the defendant's exercise of his/her right of defense against the victim" in the indictments of several times from the victim, although he/she stated that "at around January 13, 2015, the defendant

Since it is judged, it is corrected ex officio as evidence.

Now, this house was owned in this house, and this house was demanded to be "Ba.".

Nevertheless, the defendant did not comply with the request for withdrawal of the victim without good cause.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. The legal statement of the witness C;

1. A full statement of mediation and a certificate for each matter to be registered (at least two documents are attached to a written complaint);

1. Decision of the Supreme Court 2016 J. 3005

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of the words sent by the recipient A;

1. Article 319 of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime, Article 319 (2) and (1) of the Criminal Act, the selection of fines for the crime, and the selection of fines;

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

1. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act concerning the order of provisional payment;

1. Article 186(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act for Bearing Court Costs [The defendant and his/her defense counsel, and the defendant and his/her defense counsel agree that the above mediation concerning divorce, division of property, etc. with the victim will return to the house if the injured party who had withdrawn at the time of the mediation consented to the mediation

Under the premise that it is merely just to recover the marital relationship, the defendant still has the right to possess the above house or fails to comply with the request for withdrawal constitutes a justifiable act.

However, the defendant alleged as above and the quasi-examination of the above conciliation in the above court.