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

On November 11, 2017, from around 02:40 to 03:30 on the same day, the Defendant entered the main points operated by the victim C in Busan City, B, and ordered the victim to stop an acting engineer, requested the victim to do so, and then requested the victim to sit on the table on which the victim himself/herself.

When an agent on the above main point arrives in the process of the public bath, "I have been why there is no motor vehicle."

“Along with sound, an acting engineer was returned in a large amount within the said main point, and the beer, which was blicked with “Cracks, racks,” was put up on the main floor of the beer, and tacks the victim’s tacks due to the Defendant’s tacks.

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the victim's main business by force.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement made with respect to C and D;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to photographs of field CCTV images;

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. The grounds for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act [the scope of recommended punishment] [the grounds for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order and Order to Attend the lecture] (Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act / [the scope of recommended punishment] / [the special mitigated person] / [the sentence decision] / the sentence decision / the defendant's age, occupation, sex, sex, family relation, living environment, circumstances leading to the crime, etc., taking into account the following conditions of sentencing as well as the records such as the defendant's age, occupation, sex, family relation, living environment, circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence as ordered within the scope of recommended punishment

- The defendant has served 17 times from 1994 to 2017 with a criminal history related to assault, and 4 times among them was sentenced to imprisonment.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, without a good attendance, once drinking again, exercised violence, and interfered with business.

- The possibility of recidivism is very high.

- The degree of interference with work is significant.

-.