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

On September 20, 2019, the Defendant was sentenced to six months of imprisonment with prison labor for the crime of interference with business and two years of suspended execution, and the judgment became final and conclusive on September 28, 2019.

1. On September 26, 2019, the Defendant committed the crime against the victim B around September 22, 2019, the Defendant: (a) was under the influence of alcohol in the “D” restaurant operated by the victim B (V, 44 years old); and (b) was unable to enter the place where the Defendant had entered the place where he had a disturbance over about twenty (20) minutes, such as making the breath of “tog, eat, eat.”

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

2. On September 26, 2019, the Defendant committed a crime against the Victim F: (a) around 22:30 on September 26, 2019, the Defendant: (b) was under the influence of alcohol in the restaurant of “H” operated by the Victim F (the age of 63) of G, and (c) was unable to enter the restaurant of “H” with the large interest of “heat Epatt”, and (d) was allowed to become a customer who had entered the said place.

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

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each statement of B and F;

1. Previous records of judgment: Criminal records and other inquiry results, and the application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports;

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

1. The latter part of Article 37 and Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning concurrent crimes;

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

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Probation Criminal Act is that the defendant was punished several times for the same crime, and in particular, the fact that the defendant committed another crime immediately after being sentenced to the same crime is disadvantageous.

However, the fact that the defendant acknowledges and reflects the crime, that the victims do not want punishment in consultation with the victims, and that medical treatment is needed due to the aggravation of the health of the defendant, and the simple shares.