However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. On July 30, 2020, the Defendant: (a) around 02:10 on July 30, 2020, at the “D” restaurant operated by Gwangju Northern-gu B, and the Victim C, on the ground that his employee had been driven in the restaurant under the influence of alcohol, on the ground that he had previously been on the part of his employee, he was frightd in the restaurant; (b) 4 doctors were frighted in the kitchen and frighted in the kitchen; and (c) fright up to the kitchen, four doctors were frighted in the kitchen, such as a mistake on the table.

Accordingly, the Defendant damaged the property equivalent to KRW 1 million in total of the market price owned by the victim.

2. On July 30, 2020, from around 02:10 to 02:25, the Defendant obstructed the victim’s restaurant business by force by making the customers, who have frighted to the cafeterias, such as attaching the chairs, shouldering the macker, etc., as described in paragraph (1) at the cafeterias listed in paragraph (1), and by making inside the cafeterias as a cream, thereby interfering with the victim’s restaurant business by force.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. E statements;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to on-site photographs, photographs, CDs, investigative reports (Attachment to on-site CCTV images analysis), investigation reports (victims and suspects search);

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act, Article 366 of the Criminal Act, Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act, and the choice of imprisonment for a crime;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act to increase concurrent crimes;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Circumstances unfavorable to the reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Probation Criminal Act: The conditions favorable to the defendant can be punished by a fine for the same kind of crime: The defendant's mistake is recognized, the victim does not want the punishment by mutual consent with the victim, and all the sentencing factors revealed in the trial process of this case, including the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, circumstances after the crime, and circumstances after the crime, shall be determined as ordered by taking full account of