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

1. Around 21:20 on January 16, 2014, the Defendant’s obstruction of duties and damage to property found in the E main points operated by the victim D of the instant main points located in Gangnam-gu Seoul Gangnam-gu, Seoul, in order to receive the price of tight alcoholic beverages, the Defendant saw that “the president B” was placed on the floor of the instant main points, broken the chair, was seated with the said main customers, and 40 minutes until the police officer goes out of the said main points due to the victim’s report, such as interfering with the business of the said main points, and obstructing all customers in the said main points, who were on the said main points.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the business of the victim's bar business by force and damaged the property owned by the victim.

2. On January 17, 2014, the Defendant submitted a written complaint against D with respect to D to a public official in the name in the Gangnam-gu Seoul Gangnam-dong Seoul Gangnam-gu Seoul Gangnam Police Station civil petition office located in Gangnam-gu, Seoul for criminal punishment.

On January 16, 2014, the head of the accusation reported that “The Defendant D president, at around 22:20 on January 16, 2014, was the head of the E business, who was aware of the bath while taking the bath as a matter of the settlement of alcoholic beverage prices, and went beyond knee with the lower right bucks and the lower side. In doing so, assault was committed against the author.”

However, according to the 112 Report that the Defendant was performing the act of interfering with and destroying property as stated in the above Paragraph (1) at the time and place, the police officer G, etc., who belongs to the F police box, called to the above E main place on January 16, 2014. The Defendant, while taking a bath with D, went back to the front of the Defendant, and only when D went to the front of the Defendant, he did not go to the front of the Defendant and did not go to the front of the Defendant.

Accordingly, the defendant accused D with such false facts as above for the purpose of criminal punishment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. G. G.