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

On March 27, 2017, at around 20:30 on March 27, 2017, the Defendant obstructed the victim’s main business affairs by a 40-minute force, such as drinking and drinking in front of “E” operated by the victim D, which is in Seongbuk-gu, Seongbuk-gu, Sungnam-si, and drinking, and threatening the customers of the above main shop as they might be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to fright the said main shop, and allowing them to return to the said main shop, or preventing them from entering the said main shop by taking a bath to the said customers, etc.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. Application of F’s written Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. Persons who are subject to special sentencing sentencing guidelines from January to June 1: from June to June 1: from June to June 1 to on June 3: The sentence of recommending mitigation factors (unlimited to punishment): The former sentence of imprisonment with prison labor for one year (one year to September): Major factors (unapplicable for punishment), general (unapplicable for contingent crimes, absence of punishment records of more than suspended sentence, serious reflects): Imprisonment with prison labor for six months, and one year increase of suspended sentence: The past sentence of imprisonment with prison labor for the same kind of crime; four times; other kinds of crime records of the same crime; the reasons for mitigation of the suspended sentence; the confession, confession, absence of imprisonment with prison labor for more than half years; the victim's non-guilty and carbon for more than half years;