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

1. Interference with business;

A. At around 15:50 on February 20, 2014, the Defendant: (a) demanded the provision of jobs for the elderly at the “E” office of a social welfare foundation located in the fourth floor in North-gu, North Korea-gu, North Korea-si; (b) was rejected on the ground that he did not meet the qualification requirements; (c) the Defendant stated that the victim F, a social welfare worker who is a social worker working there was a complaint, and (d) said, “if he or she would know about why he or she would do, and he or she would go back,” and obstructed the victim’s social welfare work by force by avoiding disturbance for about 10 minutes.

B. On February 21, 2014, at around 10:35, the Defendant: (a) ordered the victim G (34 years of age) who is a social worker working at the above “E” office for the same reasons as the preceding paragraph; (b) that “I will do so by putting in work and spread garbage; (c) I will do suicide with gasoline and with the victim’s social welfare work by force by avoiding disturbance for about 15 minutes.”

2. On February 20, 2014, at around 15:50, the Defendant: (a) avoided disturbance as set forth in paragraph 1(a) from the above “E; and (b) caused the victim H (n) who is an employee of the said E, to spread the disturbance by hand; and (c) caused the victim’s knife to face with the victim’s knife, thereby causing the victim to suffer from approximately one week’s knife loss; and (d) caused the victim’s knife and tension to inflict an injury on the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of the witness H;

1. Statement of each police statement concerning G and F;

1. A medical certificate;

1. Determination on each of the defendants and defense counsel's arguments

1. The Defendant alleged that he was aware that he did not have any intention to inflict any injury on the victim H while making a conflict with another person while engaging in the crime described in paragraph (2) of the judgment at the time of the crime, but in full view of each of the above evidence, such as the witness H’s legal statement, etc., the Defendant’s assertion cannot be accepted since it can be sufficiently recognized as constituting the crime under paragraph (2) of the judgment

2...