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 February 3, 2018, from around 16:00 to 16:25 on the same day, the Defendant interfered with the victim’s subway station management by force by avoiding disturbances between about 50 minutes, such as: (a) 3211 train 5 (j) located in Seo-gu, Busan, Seo-gu; (b) 3211 train 5 (hereinafter referred to as the “Seoul”); (c) , without any reason, the Defendant expressed the desire to the unspecified number of passengers; and (d) seeing the urine within the history of the D Station; and (c) , by doing so.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. Application of statutes on site photographs;

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

1. Considering the reasoning for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act, considering the facts charged in the instant case with the reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the suspended sentence, there are unfavorable circumstances such as the nature of the relevant crime, and the fact that the court did not comply with the demand of the attendance, considering the confession of the crime, and the fact that the confession does not have the same power, etc., the sentence conditions under Article 51 of the Criminal Act shall be considered,