On August 30, 2013, the Defendant was sentenced to a total of one year and one month imprisonment at the Seoul Southern District Court for fraud, etc., and the said judgment was finalized on November 14, 2013. On December 27, 2012, the Seoul Northern District Court sentenced ten months of imprisonment with prison labor due to assault, etc. at the Seoul Northern District Court, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on October 21, 2014.

1. On March 2, 2012, the Defendant of the 2015 Highest 4965, around 04:30 on March 2, 2012, the Defendant engaged in an act of disturbing drinking alcohol in the Western district located in the Dong-dong, Chungcheongnam-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu, Chungcheongnam-do.

2. At around 06:40 on January 3, 2015, the Defendant: (a) expressed the Defendant at a restaurant operated by the victim W, who was in the Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, the Defendant interfered with the victim’s restaurant business by force, such as: (b) doing so for about one hour on the ground that X, an employee of the said restaurant, did not sell alcohol to the Defendant on the ground that he was under the influence of alcohol.

Summary of Evidence

"2015 Highest 4965"

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Records of issuance of a written request for summary trial, written notification, inquiry into an investigation report, and written notification;

1. "Inquirys of criminal and investigation records" 2015 Highest 496;

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A written statement, written agreement, and receipt;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes for investigation reporting;

1. Article 3 (1) 20 of the relevant Act on the Punishment of Minor Offenses and Article 3 (1) 20 of the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act (the point of disturbing sound addresses and the selection of fines) and Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of obstructing business and the selection

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. The sentencing of Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act with respect to the crime of interference with business on the grounds of the punishment shall be determined as set forth in the order, comprehensively taking into account all the circumstances, including the fact that the victim agreed smoothly through compensation and the health status of the defendant.