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

At around 22:00 on May 15, 201, the Defendant interfered with the victim’s EM business for about one hour, including: (a) the victim D (year 57) in Geumcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, without any particular reason, in the “EM” store operated by the victim D (year 57); and (b) the victim’s EM business for about one hour, such as: (c) the victim’s “Chewing, dead, and dead”; and (d) the customers in such a place are humped to the large amount of “this hump hump?h?h?h?h?h?h?h?h?h?h?h?h?h? to the customers in the place, they want to take the above h

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

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Examination protocol of police suspect regarding D;

1. 112. List of reported cases;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to each investigation report (a summary report by telephone);

1. Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act and the choice of imprisonment with prison labor concerning the relevant criminal facts;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspension of execution (including the fact that the person has not committed the previous punishment and that there was agreement);

1. Article 62-2 (1) of the Criminal Act on Probation;