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

On October 26, 2013, the Defendant: (a) around 11:40 on October 26, 2013, at the “E” restaurant operated by the victim D in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, wherein the Defendant’s daily traffic and drinking were carried out; (b) the instant daily traffic and vision occurred; and (c) the Defendant followed the table table, which was located there, and laid down a down the wall of the said restaurant.

As such, F (38 years of age) and G (39 years of age), who is an employee of the above restaurant, were the Defendant, the Defendant was unable to enter the restaurant by avoiding disturbance for 20 minutes, including the following: (a) the back head part of F was 1 time in drinking, and the breath was flicked by her hand; (b) the Defendant was flicked with her f’s f’s f’s f’s f’s f’s f’s f’s f’s f’s f’s f’s f’

As a result, the defendant damaged the wall walls of the above cafeteria, and interfered with the victim's restaurant business by force.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of the police statement concerning F;

1. G statements;

1. Application of statutes on site photographs;

1. Articles 366 and 314 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting an offense;

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

1. It is so decided as per Disposition for the reason that Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (including the fact that the defendant has agreed with the victims and the defendant has committed a mistake, and that the defendant has no criminal record) is more than that of the Criminal Act;