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

1. On January 8, 2013, at around 21:20, the Defendant: (a) expressed the victim’s desire to call for calculation of the drinking value, etc. at the “D” log of the victim’s operation “D” located in Yansan-gu Seoul Metropolitan City, the Defendant interfered with the victim’s main business by force, including 50 minutes of the disturbance, such as “Is the need to call for the system as to the change of Nece,” “Is the width, weather report, and if I do not report it, I do not need to do so;” and “Is the victim’s main business.”

2. On January 8, 2013, at the same place, the Defendant: (a) heard the phrase “I am, spathy, spathy, and spathy,” “I am, spathy, spathy, spathy, spathy, spathy, and spathy,” and “I am spathy, spathy, spathy, spathy, spathy, spathy, spathy,” and “I spathy, spathy, spathy, spathy’s face, spathy, two times after having f’s face face, spathy’s spathy, and spathy, spathy, and spathy, and interfere with the performance of duties of the police officer, etc. at the same time, and interfere with the maintenance of order of the victim’s.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement concerning C and F;

1. G statements;

1. Application of the legislation in its opinion;

1. Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the relevant criminal facts, Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act and Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the criminal facts;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes;

1. Selection of each sentence of imprisonment;

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 (The following extenuating circumstances among the reasons for sentencing);

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act of the community service order.