On April 25, 2020, at around 13:00, the Defendant interfered with the victim’s waterworks construction work by force for about 40 minutes, such as drinking water supply site managed by the victim C (50 years of age) in Pyeongtaek-si B, obstructing the passage of vehicles by enjoying on the road floor by drinking water supply facilities, and harming the traffic of the vehicles on the surface of the road, taking the victim and the persons who were working for the work, and taking a desire to flading the victim and the people

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to C by the police;

1. Written statements of D;

1. Application of documentary evidence photographic Acts and subordinate statutes

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and reasons for sentencing under Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the choice of punishment;

1. Scope of applicable sentences under law: One to five years of imprisonment;

2. Scope of the recommended punishment according to the sentencing criteria (the determination of types) [the category 1] interference with business: Where the degree of force, deceptive scheme or the degree of interference with business is insignificant (the scope of the recommended area and the range of the recommended punishment) and the area of mitigation (the range of the recommended area and the recommended punishment), one month to eight months by imprisonment.

3. Determination of sentence: (a) comprehensively taking into account all factors of sentencing as indicated in the pleadings of the instant case, such as the following circumstances and the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, motive for committing a crime, means and consequence of committing a crime; and (b) the circumstances after committing a crime

D. On the other hand, the defendant's motive, behavior pattern, duration of the crime, attitude after the crime, etc. are not less and less severe in light of the defendant's motive, behavior pattern, duration of the crime, attitude after the crime, etc. as a matter of interference with the business on September 7, 2018. In particular, the defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for 6 months and 2 years under the obstruction of the business on September 7, 2018, and was sentenced to a fine on several occasions without being divided entirely or even if he was under the suspension of the execution, the act of interference with the business in this case was committed repeatedly and repeatedly without being sentenced to the suspension of the execution. In light of the defendant's tendency, the defendant's danger and peace of the community is harmful.