Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 300,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant from June 24, 2011 to the same year.

8. Until December 12, 198, the victim C was treated in a hospital operated by the victim C.

From December 13, 2011 to December 28, 201 of the same year, the Defendant: (a) placed a banner stating that “I see and tell a hospital in an in-depth manner in which I am old at the hospital in Gangseo-gu Seoul, Seoul; (b)” and “I am old at the hospital in an in-depth manner; and (c) interfered with the operation of the victim hospital by force by force, such as making customers who want to undergo an operation in the above hospital report on the above banner.”

Summary of Evidence

1. A protocol of examination of part of the defendant by prosecution;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. The application of six-dimensional Acts and subordinate statutes to six photographs taken with a head of a demonstration A; and

1. Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes;

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

1. The defense counsel's assertion on the defense counsel under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act asserts that since the defendant's medical malpractice by the medical personnel at the hospital was punished by one person's demonstration in order to resist the passive damage compensation to the hospital's side, and thus, it constitutes a legitimate act that does not violate the social rules.

However, even though the defendant made a decision that there was a problem in the diagnosis and treatment of a hospital's medical staff, as seen below, the defendant appears to have been a considerable reason for the above decision, and the defendant was committed the crime of this case in the course of demanding and resisting the above problem, the above evidence is considered to have been comprehensively taken into account, i.e., the defendant, when the medical malpractice of the hospital was determined or when it was clearly revealed, beyond the level of an ordinary question or resistance to the existence of medical malpractice.