1. On October 20, 2014, the Defendant violated the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (injury by collective action, deadly weapons, etc.) around October 23:15, 2014, at the main point of “D” located in Gwangju Mine-gu, the Defendant 200: (a) had been engaged in drinking and drinking alcohol on the side table of “D” while drinking and drinking alcohol; (b) had been placed on the table of the Defendant; and (c) had been placed on the table of the Defendant, and had been placed on the table of the Defendant 2. The Defendant 2:3 times left the part of the victim E (the victim 54 years old) who drinking and drinking alcohol together with the above dangerous male, and had been placed on the table of the Defendant 2 weeks in order for him/her to take care of his/her head.

2. On October 20, 2014, from around 23:15 to 23:35 of the same day, the Defendant: (a) viewed the victim F as being under the influence of alcohol at the main points specified in paragraph (1) operated by the victim F; (b) caused the disturbance of the Defendant to go away from the place; and (c) caused the customers to go away from the place, by getting the customer, such as getting the customer to a beer, and getting the customer to a beer with the head of E, who is the customer.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the victim's restaurant business by force.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement to F and E;

1. The scene of damage from photographs taken;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of a medical certificate;

1. Article 3 (1) and Article 2 (1) 3 of the Act on the Punishment of Violences, etc. of Specific Crimes, Articles 2 (1) and 2 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act, Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act and Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of interference with business and the choice of imprisonment);

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act (within the scope of adding up long-term punishments);

1. The crime of this case on the grounds of sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation is a shoulderer who obstructs the restaurant business and is a dangerous object.