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 July 16, 2017, at around 22:00, the Defendant took a bath at the victim C’s singing practice room operated by the victim C, who is located in the Busan Shodong-gu B, with a large amount of interest, such as “nick” and “Chos”, and instead took a bath for about one hour and 20 minutes without the victim’s return request.

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the singing operation of the victimized person by force.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Application of the police statement protocol law to C

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 stay of execution (The following favorable circumstances required for the reasons for sentencing);

1. Grounds for sentencing, comprehensively taking account of the following facts: Subparag. 2 of Article 2-3, Articles 44-2(1) and 44-2(2) and the main text of Article 44-3 (3) of the Act on the Order for Medical Treatment, Protection, Medical Care, etc. (the Defendant committed the instant crime under the influence of the Defendant, and the Defendant, other than each of the instant crimes, has committed violence under the influence of alcohol and has been subject to criminal punishment several times under the influence of violence, etc., it is recognized that the Defendant has a habitle to drinking alcohol, and the risk of recidivism and the necessity for receiving medical treatment may also be recognized)

1. The scope of punishment by law: Imprisonment for not more than five years;

2. Class 1 (Interference with Business) (Special Sentencing) mitigated elements on the basis of the sentencing guidelines: The area of mitigation of punishment [the area of recommendation, the scope of recommendation], the area of mitigation of punishment, one month to eight months in imprisonment.

3. Although the Defendant had had had the record of criminal punishment by giving rise to a number of violent crimes, the error in the judgment of sentence is not easy in that the Defendant committed again the instant crime.

However, the degree of force exercised by the defendant in this case, relationship between the defendant and the victim, age and environment of the defendant, the victim and the scene of the crime in this case.

Masing employees and their offsprings.