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

On December 12, 2016, from around 05:30 to 06:00 on the same day, the Defendant: (a) expressed that the drinking value at the entertainment entertainment entertainment store operated by the victim C (the age of 52) located in Pyeongtaek-si B (the age of 52) was not high; and (b) expressed that the Defendant did not extend the hours of the entertainment entertainment entertainment entertainment service by one hour more; (c) stated that the Defendant “the Defendant would have expressed the victim’s desire to throw away crys, sicks, and homicides for the same year; and (d) the Defendant could not enter the entertainment entertainment place by avoiding the disturbance between approximately 30 minutes, such as caring the door, thereby obstructing the Plaintiff from entering the entertainment entertainment entertainment place by force.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against C;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to photographs by cutting 112 reported case processing slips and video closures;

1. Relevant Article 314 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment;

1. The sentence identical to the order shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account the following conditions of sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act, including the Defendant’s age, occupation, sex, family relationship, and the circumstances before and after the commission of the crime.

- The nature of the crime of this case does not correspond to that of the crime of this case, except that the damage caused by the crime of this case is not significant. - The defendant is against his mistake.