The defendant shall be innocent.

1. On March 27, 2015, from around 14:00 to March 14:30, 2015, the Defendant obstructed the victim’s restaurant business by force for about 30 minutes, by entering a restaurant of “H operated by the victim G with the second floor in the E-building (owner F) in which the Defendant located in Gangnam-gu Seoul, Seoul, for the Defendant, located in the manager, for the second floor, for the victim’s rent and management expenses, and for the payment of the victim’s rents and management expenses.”

2. Direct evidence that corresponds to the facts charged in the judgment lies in ① the statement in the victim G court and the investigative agency, ② the statement in the I court and the investigative agency, ③ the statement in March 27, 2015, ③ the statement in March 27, 2015, ④ the K court statement and the statement in June 6, 2015, etc.

However, considering the various circumstances that examine and explain the evidence submitted by the defendant, the above evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone cannot be readily concluded that the defendant committed an act identical to the facts charged, and otherwise, there is insufficient evidence to prove the facts charged to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt.

(A) The Defendant visited the restaurant of the victim in order to obtain the smuggling water tax on the day of the instant case, and conducted a somewhat speech with the victim. However, there is no material to deem that the content or degree of the act exceeded the permissible scope pursuant to social rules. The victim filed a complaint only after he/she took place on May 28, 2015 from the day of the instant case, which was two months from the day of the instant case, and the previous Defendant filed a complaint under the suspicion of interference with business, and was notified of the disposition of non-guilty charge on May 11, 2015.

The police dispatched to the site on the day of the incident only directed the defendant of the civil procedure after moving the defendant out of the restaurant, and did not separately enter the victim or report the details of the disturbance. On the same day, the police reported around 14:08 and sent the victim to the site at around 14:11.